From jkellock at amnesty.org Tue Dec 1 02:27:43 1998 From: jkellock at amnesty.org (jkellock@amnesty.org) Date: Mon, 30 Nov 1998 17:27:43 +0000 Subject: [asia-apec 930] Job Description Southeast Asia Actionaid Message-ID: <802566CC.006005E6.00@fox.amnesty.org> Please pass on this information to anyone you think might be interested (NB applications from ASEAN citizens are encouraged): ActionAid Asia Terms of Reference for the Southeast Asia Programme Officer Introduction This follows the reports and recommendations of the Southeast Asia Appraisal exercise completed at the end of September 1998. This position of Southeast Asia Programme Officer , initially for a period of one year, has been created to move forward with enhancing and intensifying ActionAid;s work and engagement in the Southeast Asia. This position will be funded from general fund allocation for new country initiatives in the 1999 budget of Asia Regional Office. Terms of Reference The Southeast Asia Programme Officer will have the following broad responsibilities and tasks, which are in line with the recommendations of the Southeast Appraisal Report, for this period of employment: To carry out appraisal and make necessary arrangements to establish a sponsorship-based poverty focused partnership and programmes in Philippines. To accomplish further detailed country appraisals in Cambodia and Indonesia. To develop appropriate sub-regional project proposals (for partnership and fundraising) for at least 3 of the five following broad thematic issues recommended in the SEAsia Appraisal Report: Sustainable livelihood and food security HIV/AIDS NGO-CBO Capacity Strengthening Challenging economic growth-led models Micro-finance To further develop existing or initiate new appropriate partnership, association and alliance with regional and sub-regional organisations, network, fora and processes. To inform ActionAid Asia Regional Team regularly about the situations, events and trends related to poverty, development and key-player activities in the Southeast Asia sub-region. To participate and play an active role in the development of ActionAid's organisation and work in the Asia Region. To submit a detailed bi-monthly report to the line manager. Employment Conditions The successful candidate will have a high level of relevant analytical skills and experience related to poverty focused NGO programmes, networks and alliances. She or he will also have excellent inter-personal and communication skills. The successful candidate will be able to work from the location where she or he is currently located (provided it has good communication and transport links) in the Southeast Asia sub-region but a substantial travel particularly in the sub-region is a requirement of the job. A competitive salary and benefit package applicable to the conditions offered by international NGOs in the country will be offered. Further expansion of ActionAid's work in this region can lead this position to be converted into a longer-term appointment from the year 2000. The Southeast Asia Programme Officer will report to the Country Director of ActionAid Vietnam who has partial responsibility for development of ActionAid programmes and relations in the sub-region. ActionAid will consider taking people also on secondment from other organisation for this period of contract. Preference will be given to individuals who live in or come from and know about this sub-region well. 30 November 1998. From r.daniels at qut.edu.au Tue Dec 1 18:02:36 1998 From: r.daniels at qut.edu.au (Ross Daniels) Date: Tue, 01 Dec 1998 09:02:36 +0000 Subject: [asia-apec 931] Re: Job Description Southeast Asia Actionaid Message-ID: <3.0.32.19981201090236.007edae0@pop.qut.edu.au> At 17:27 30/11/98 +0000, you wrote: > > > >Please pass on this information to anyone you think might be interested (NB >applications from ASEAN citizens are encouraged): > >ActionAid Asia >Terms of Reference for the Southeast Asia Programme Officer > >Introduction >This follows the reports and recommendations of the Southeast Asia >Appraisal exercise completed at the end of September 1998. This position of >Southeast Asia Programme Officer , initially for a period of one year, has >been created to move forward with enhancing and intensifying ActionAid;s >work and engagement in the Southeast Asia. This position will be funded >from general fund allocation for new country initiatives in the 1999 budget >of Asia Regional Office. > >Terms of Reference >The Southeast Asia Programme Officer will have the following broad >responsibilities and tasks, which are in line with the recommendations of >the Southeast Appraisal Report, for this period of employment: > >To carry out appraisal and make necessary arrangements to establish a >sponsorship-based poverty focused partnership and programmes in >Philippines. >To accomplish further detailed country appraisals in Cambodia and >Indonesia. >To develop appropriate sub-regional project proposals (for partnership and >fundraising) for at least 3 of the five following broad thematic issues >recommended in the SEAsia Appraisal Report: >Sustainable livelihood and food security >HIV/AIDS >NGO-CBO Capacity Strengthening >Challenging economic growth-led models >Micro-finance >To further develop existing or initiate new appropriate partnership, >association and alliance with regional and sub-regional organisations, >network, fora and processes. >To inform ActionAid Asia Regional Team regularly about the situations, >events and trends related to poverty, development and key-player activities >in the Southeast Asia sub-region. >To participate and play an active role in the development of ActionAid's >organisation and work in the Asia Region. >To submit a detailed bi-monthly report to the line manager. > >Employment Conditions > >The successful candidate will have a high level of relevant analytical >skills and experience related to poverty focused NGO programmes, networks >and alliances. She or he will also have excellent inter-personal and >communication skills. >The successful candidate will be able to work from the location where she >or he is currently located (provided it has good communication and >transport links) in the Southeast Asia sub-region but a substantial travel >particularly in the sub-region is a requirement of the job. >A competitive salary and benefit package applicable to the conditions >offered by international NGOs in the country will be offered. >Further expansion of ActionAid's work in this region can lead this position >to be converted into a longer-term appointment from the year 2000. >The Southeast Asia Programme Officer will report to the Country Director of >ActionAid Vietnam who has partial responsibility for development of >ActionAid programmes and relations in the sub-region. >ActionAid will consider taking people also on secondment from other >organisation for this period of contract. >Preference will be given to individuals who live in or come from and know >about this sub-region well. > >30 November 1998. > > > Ross VISIT MY HOME PAGES: http://arts.qut.edu.au/humanrights/ http://arts.qut.edu.au/AustraliaRight/ ROSS DANIELS PHONE: [61] [7] 38644547 WK LECTURER [61] [7] 33006530 HM SCHOOL OF SOCIAL SCIENCE 0413760357 MOBILE QUT FAX: [61] [7] 38644995 WK BRISBANE, AUSTRALIA [61] [7] 33001279 HM From rverzola at phil.gn.apc.org Wed Dec 2 05:46:05 1998 From: rverzola at phil.gn.apc.org (Roberto Verzola) Date: Wed, 02 Dec 1998 05:46:05 Subject: [asia-apec 933] Fwd: "Alternatives to Globalization" Conference Statement Message-ID: <199812022206.GAA00665@phil.gn.apc.org> I don't think the statement below has been circulated on this list. The statement was adopted during the "International Conference on Alternatives to Globalization", which was held in the Philippines, November 7-9th, 1998. I believe around 100 participants attended. Perhaps the organizers Ibon Databank or Bayan can include the complete list of organizations which endorsed the statement? Roberto Verzola Secretary-General Philippine Greens --------------------------------------- Conference Statement Approved November 9, 1998 Tagaytay City, Philippines We, as individuals and groups from 31 countries in Asia and the Pacific, Latin America, Africa, Europe and North America, representing people's movements, networks, organizations, centers, institutes and academe, have come together in the International Conference on Alternatives to Globalization with two objectives: first, to seek a deeper understanding of the global economic crisis and its causes; second, on the basis of our shared views and experiences, to explore and develop alternative strategies and paradigms in confronting globalization. Directly linked to the crisis is globalization - the neoliberal offensive or contemporary conveyance of monopoly capital to maximize the extraction of profit. To this end, globalization uses modern technology (such as robotics and information technology) and the political prescriptions - liberalization, deregulation and privatization - of the triad multilateral institutions, the International Monetary Fund (IMF), World Bank (WB) and World Trade Organization (WTO). Globalization has worsened the effects of the destructive paradigm of "growth and development." Instead of economic prosperity and social stability that it promised for all nations, globalization has brought about economic turmoil, political and social tension, and widespread devastation to the world's peoples and resources. The myth of globalization has thus been fully exposed and debunked. The impacts of the global crisis are all so clearly seen today. The gap between the rich and poor in all nations, industrial and non-industrial alike, and between the rich and poor countries is widening rather than narrowing. Moreover, with the trend towards mergers and acquisitions, increasingly much more wealth - and power - is being concentrated in the hands of fewer monopoly capitalists who control the transnational corporations (TNCs). The systematic assaults on labor is dissipating the working class gains, causing widespread unemployment, job insecurity, loss of benefits, the destruction of trade unions. The massive displacement of workers leads to the rise and further commodification of migrant workers. The peasants' limited gains in agrarian reform are likewise being reversed, resulting in more landlessness, rural unemployment and penury. Exploitation of women labor, especially unpaid labor, in farms and factories is intensified. The crisis causes more women and children to be displaced, commodified and economically and sexually exploited as modern-day slaves. Patriarchy remains a key problem and physical violence on women and children, both inside and outside the home, is prevalent. The indigenous people's struggle against exclusion, for their right to self-determination, recognition of equal rights as citizens and right to ancestral lands or historical domain is rendered more difficult. In many instances their very survival is being threatened by environmental degradation, mainly caused by TNCs, and by the state policies of disguised genocide. Global environmental abuse is being accelerated primarily by globalization. The ill effects include climate change, ozone depletion, air and water pollution, ocean resource depletion and pollution, deforestation, extinction of species and dangerous genetic manipulation. All these problems are arising because of the irrational pursuit of profit by rampaging capitalism. Everywhere globalization is eroding the gains of social movements in all aspects (political, social and cultural). There is a general regression of democracy, as economic impositions by states entail increasing human rights violations, not only of economic, social and cultural rights, but of political and civil rights as well. In the third world, as the majority of the people are marginalized economically, they are also disempowered politically. State power in defense of the people's rights and welfare is increasingly undermined. On the other hand, state power is, more than ever, being used to step up the implementation of the neoliberal prescriptions of globalization, in the form of national legislation, bilateral agreements with IMF and WB, multilateral pacts under the WTO regime, and regional and other arrangements. The very proponents of globalization have acknowledged that the global crisis embroils the entire capitalist system. They likewise admit the inevitability of cyclical crises as inherent in the system. They warn of its recurrence even as they confess failure to find a solution to the current global crisis. Far from nearing its end, the crisis threatens to get even worse. As the liberalization and deregulation drive is being pushed to the maximum - via the Multilateral Agreement on Investment (MAI) and the WTO - the situation can only deteriorate. Inexorably, the crisis has set in motion a growing opposition to globalization among the adversely affected peoples, both organized and unorganized, in all regions of the world. The rising level of popular opposition is manifested in organized as well as spontaneous protest actions, and in various creative, if less dramatic, ways. The International Conference on Alternatives to Globalization is one manifestation of this growing opposition. It is a closing of ranks of diverse movements and initiatives toward more effective resistance to globalization. United in resisting and rejecting globalization, we are determined to develop, through our separate and unified initiatives, effective strategies and paradigms of economic and social development different from the "growth and development" paradigm that has driven peoples to further economic marginalization and political disempowerment. Over the long term, we shall strive to develop alternative paradigms that uphold and safeguard the peoples' interest, rights, welfare and values, ensures their sovereign control of their natural and human resources, guarantees economic democracy, democratic governance, and their right to determine their national destiny. Certainly, we have different ways and means to achieve such paradigms, and we respect each other's independence in pursuing the goal. In the short term, we shall take steps to strengthen the capacities of peoples and communities to defend themselves against the onslaughts of globalization. We shall take recourse, principally, in expanding and strengthening our organizations, sustaining education and pursuing actions of resistance and struggle that have been proven effective, while we explore and develop new ones as conditions may require. Specifically, we call for the following urgent actions: * Expose and oppose the MAI and prevent its negotiation within the WTO by immediately launching sustained national and international campaigns. Work for the withdrawal of the harmful agreements on agriculture and TRIPs from the WTO. * Campaign for the non-payment of foreign loans by nations in crisis. Oppose the signing of new letters of intent with the IMF and reject all onerous loan conditionalities. * Oppose foreign military intervention in the internal affairs of nations as it violates their sovereignty and right to self-determination. * Support the OilWatch declaration against new fossil fuel exploration. We firmly resolve to expand, intensify and sustain worldwide resistance against globalization. Separately and together, we shall consistently wage militant struggles until we defeat this modern scourge. From gattwd at corso.ch.planet.gen.nz Wed Dec 2 13:51:24 1998 From: gattwd at corso.ch.planet.gen.nz (Gatt Watchdog) Date: Wed, 02 Dec 1998 16:51:24 +1200 Subject: [asia-apec 934] GATT Watchdog Media Release: APEC Message-ID: GATT Watchdog PO Box 1905 Christchurch Aotearoa/New Zealand MEDIA RELEASE 2 December 1998 Shipley Government Running Scared On APEC On the eve of a post-APEC business breakfast briefing by the Prime Minister, Jenny Shipley at the Hotel Grand Chancellor in Christchurch, GATT Watchdog says the Shipley Government is running scared as it tries to drum up support for APEC from New Zealand businesses. GATT Watchdog had discussed mounting protest action outside the Prime Minister's address tomorrow, but decided that the government, in its desperation to promote APEC, was doing such a good job of discrediting itself and the free trade agenda that it was not necessary. "It is running out of ideas as it seeks public support for spending at least $45 million to host APEC at a time when the forum's credibility is at an all-time low. Even New Zealand businesspeople are now questioning APEC and government claims about it," says a GATT Watchdog spokesperson, Aziz Choudry. He pointed to industrialist Gilbert Ullrich, who last week challenged government support for APEC, the unilateral reduction of tariffs and the destruction of many small industries. Mr Ullrich had said that if APEC turns out to be an exercise in self-delusion, "it won't bring back the industries or jobs that we consigned to oblivion in our desire to lead the world." "The pathetic post-APEC Summit posturing of Jenny Shipley and her senior ministers merely draws attention to the enormous gap between their rhetoric and the reality of the failure of APEC to deal with the economic crisis, and inability to agree on the early voluntary sector liberalisation package", said Mr Choudry. "The Government is disingenuously trying to present the outcomes of the Kuala Lumpur APEC Summit as a wonderful success, a victory for free trade, and for New Zealand. But behind all their upbeat pep-talks lies the fact that the free trade, free market model of development, and the institutions and processes that promote it are undergoing a major crisis of legitimacy. Despite many calls to rethink the narrow focus on open trade and investment as a means to achieve economic growth, Shipley and co. show no sign of moving away from pursuing aggressive trade and investment liberalisation within APEC. This continued adherence to market ideology suggests an ostrich-like desire not to deal with the real world." "Beyond its wild promises and unsubstantiated claims about the benefits of APEC, the Shipley government has nothing to say. Even the Australian study which the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade relies on to show the benefits of APEC projects a mere 0.4% total gain in New Zealand's real GNP after 20 years - not annually - as a result of liberalisation within APEC. The government has been strangely silent about these figures." "Apparently, one of the key themes of New Zealand's year as chair of APEC will be "the building of broader support for APEC among the wider communities of which we are part." But the government's message is quite simple - "APEC is good for you because we say so". The government's public relations strategy on APEC is a cynical exercise which seeks to avoid any serious debate," he said. "This year, almost ten years after New Zealand joined APEC, the government announced a Parliamentary Inquiry into APEC and New Zealand's role in APEC. Curiously enough, submissions to the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Select Committee on APEC appear to have fallen into a black hole." "While the government has been consulting with New Zealand businesses about their priorities for APEC 1999, documents released under the Official Information Act show that the only consultation it proposes with non-governmental organisations and Maori is purely for cosmetic purposes." "More and more people in New Zealand are questioning the benefits of a free market economic model which has been tried, tested and has failed to benefit the vast majority of people. The government clearly has not learnt from its bad mishandling of the MAI issue. Instead of promoting genuine, balanced and open debate on APEC, it is determined to fob us off with empty promises and PR claptrap. Its strategy for handling APEC will come back to haunt it sooner than it thinks," warned Mr Choudry. From panap at panap.po.my Thu Dec 3 09:29:04 1998 From: panap at panap.po.my (PAN Asia Pacific) Date: Thu, 03 Dec 1998 09:29:04 Subject: [asia-apec 935] Update on Tian Chua (fwd) Message-ID: <3268@panap.po.my> Dear Friends, We apologise to those who have been clammering for updates on Tian Chua. We were not able to give any until now, as there were some problems with our modem. Somehow it's now sorted out. On 30th Nov 1998, Tian Chua was released on bail after being charged for illegal gathering and failure to disperse. His bond was set at RM 2000 with one surety. As soon as he left the registrar after bail was posted, he was rearrested immediately and led to a police van. He was then taken to Petaling Jaya police station and remained there until his remand hearing on 1 Dec 1998. During his remand hearing on 1st Dec 1998, the prosecuting officer said it was necessary to detain him for further questioning on suspicion of Sedition Act S4(2) (possession of sedition materials). Prosecution officer asked for 7 days remand. The magistrate granted him 5. Tian Chua's lawyers also asked for medication and water to be delivered to him and a medical checkup, in which the magistrate agreed. Tian Chua's remand will be finished on 5th Dec 1998, Saturday. At this point, we do not know what course of action the police will be taking. The possibilities are as follows: (1) further remand up to 9 days; (2) to be charged in court; (3) released on police bail; (4) under the Internal Security Act (this is if the government feels Tian Chua constitute a 'threat' to national security). Below is a letter that was smuggled out from Tian Chua to his friends. ---------------------------------------------------- http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/1577/tianletter2.html (received by Suaram 1/12/98) Dear friends, Got into PJ (Petaling Jaya) lock-up about 4:30 pm. Met Nusrat briefly at the police office, then the SBs quickly took me into the lock-up. The conditions - cleanliness wise - here are much better, at least the groud is lined with plankwood, instead of cement as in Dang Wangi. As soon as I got in, I was greeted by several 'reformasi' people. One of them was Zulkifli, some one I met earlier in one of the gatherings. There were about 5 of them, caught in Serdang. I haven't had a chance to speak to them yet. I was shocked at the extent of the arrest of the 'reformasi' people. It is obvious that crackdown on the supporters for refom is very widespread. When I was in the courtroom waiting for the bail, I also met 2 other Indonesians who were caught in Kampung Baru during the October demo and had been sitting in Sungai Buloh prison for a month. They said their cells were near to Datuk Nalla. They have another 4 friends who could not be bailed out because of no valid documents. Here I met another Indonesian who is kept opposite my cell, told me that when he was in Sg. Buloh prison, he met Anwar and shook his hand. As a result he was hit by the guard with a stick. But he said that was worth it because he supported the cause of 'reformasi'. He had been in Malaysia for 13 years and married with a pregnant wife. However he would be deported for no valid documents. He said Mahathir is no different from Suharto; they are both dictators who refuse to give up power and allow the emergence of new leaders. "Power would corrupt if it stays in the same hand for too long", he said. The support for change really goes right through to the base of society. In the lock-ups (here and Dang Wangi), even drug addicts and robbers talked about corruption of Mahathir regime. They also talked a lot about justice for Anwar. I tried whenever I can to interact with all these detainees. It is important to let them see that 'reformasi' is not something distant from their lives. The prevailance of justice must also bring fundamental change to these detainees - whom almost all end up in the lock-ups because they are poor or powerless. The objective of reform, apart from ensuring a just legal process and enforcement system, is to have social and economic restructuring. Maybe this still sounds too abstract. I recall the legal aid system in Australia and UK where people can engage lawyers and the fees would be paid by legal aid. At least poor people can get access to good legal services. Malaysian present Bureau of Legal Aid basically penalizes people who have no resources. Love and regards, Tian 30/11/98, nite. -------------------------------------------------------- ABOLISH I.S.A.! MANSUHKAN I.S.A! SIGN JUST WORLD'S WHITE RIBBON/SIGNATURE CAMPAIGN FOR JUSTICE! http://www.jaring.my/just --------------------------------------------------------- SUARA RAKYAT MALAYSIA (SUARAM) add: 11, Jalan 1A/71E, Jalan Carey, 46000 Petaling Jaya, Selangor, Malaysia tel: 60-3-7943525 fax: 7943526 email: suaram@geocities.com, wkpeng@pc.jaring.my website:http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Lobby/1577 From mtachiba at jca.ax.apc.org Thu Dec 3 19:57:42 1998 From: mtachiba at jca.ax.apc.org (Tachibana Masahiko) Date: Thu, 3 Dec 1998 19:57:42 +0900 Subject: [asia-apec 936] Press Release: Global "NO Pesticides Day" Launched (PAN-AP) Message-ID: Below is a mail failed to deliver because of the big graphic file attached, which I deleted on this reposting. Tachibana Masahiko -- one of the owner-asia-apec@jca.ax.apc.org --------------------------------------------------------------------- Pesticide Action Network Press Release Global "NO Pesticides Day" Launched December 3rd 1984 will live in infamy. On the evening of that fateful day, Union Carbide's pesticide-manufacturing plant in Bhopal, India leaked 42 metric tonnes of methyl isocyanate, a heavy deadly gas, into a sleeping, impoverished community - killing over 2,500 people and injuring up to 200,000 others. This December 3rd, 1998, the global Pesticide Action Network (PAN) is launching the "NO Pesticides Use Day" in commemoration of the hundreds who died, and the thousands who suffered the disaster at Bhopal. The Day is also to draw attention to the life threatening impacts of chemical pesticides on people and the environment. The Bhopal massacre exposed the negligence and culpability of transnational corporations. Union Carbide accepted 'moral responsibility' for the Bhopal massacre, but then denied and evaded any other kind of responsibility. While it eventually agreed to pay $470 million in compensation, for most victims this was not even enough to pay their medical bills. Since the incident, Union Carbide has closed and abandoned its Bhopal plant which produced pesticides for use in cotton production. But it refused to clean up the substantial pollution of water and soil it left - and it has forsaken the tens of thousands of victims who must now fend for themselves. "We can never forget Bhopal" stated Sarojeni V. Rengam of PAN Asia and the Pacific at the launch of this campaign. "Bhopal is a tragedy that need not have happened. PAN International is launching a day of "NO Pesticides Use" in memory of those who have suffered at Bhopal", she continued. As the years pass, the harms attributable to the Bhopal disaster grow worse as now health impacts are still being uncovered. In 1995 a neighbourhood clinic - the Bhopal People's Health and Documentation Centre, Sambhavna - was set up to help people still suffering after effects of the tragedy. "The clinic was started from voluntary contributions from thousands of people around the world who are standing up against unacceptable business practises and corporate irresponsibility which caused such devastation," explained Barbara Dinham of the Pesticides Trust UK. Bhopal however, was only one intense instance of chemical pesticide contamination. The manufacture, distribution, and use of chemical pesticides have for years had devastating impacts on people and the environment. Every year about 3 million people are poisoned around the world and 200,000 die from pesticide use. Beyond these reported acute cases of pesticide poisoning, even more worrying are the chronic long term effects such as cancers. Of late there has been increasing evidence and concern over pesticides that mimic natural hormones (known as endocrine disrupters), possibly causing a wide variety of adverse effects - not only on specific body organs and systems but also on the endocrine system including reduction in male sperm count, and undescended testes as well as breast cancer While most pesticide-related deaths occur in the South, pesticides also pose serious problems in industrialized countries. In both rich and poor countries, the effects of pesticide poisoning are suffered disproportionately by poor and disadvantaged people. Children are particularly vulnerable to pesticides exposure. Commenting on the trends of the pesticides industry, Barbara Dinham warned that, "the alarming consolidation of the pesticides and seeds industries, and aggressive marketing of herbicide-resistant crops being developed via genetic engineering technology, is leading to a dramatic increase in pesticide use in developing countries. This has accelerated dependence on pesticide use world-wide!" Around the world, pesticide use has permeated even the remotest village. In the South, the availability of highly toxic pesticides, lack of information and knowledge of their hazards, aggressive marketing by industry as well as poverty, illiteracy, and lack of health facilities in the rural areas ensure that pesticides are a major cause of poisoning in farming communities. This is why "we need to take the 'No Pesticides Use' message to the grassroots, to every village... every person needs to understand the dangers that pesticides pose to human health and the environment" stressed Luis Gomerro of PAN Latin America. Commenting of the goals of the campaign, Sarojeni V. Rengam added, "the Campaign will not only show the human and environmental hazards of chemical pesticides but also stress that pesticide use is unnecessary in food and fibre production". Pesticide Action Network (PAN) is a global coalition of citizen's groups and individuals who oppose the misuse and overuse of pesticides, and support the reliance on safe and sustainable alternatives. PAN links over 300 groups in 50 countries and operates through 5 regional centers: PAN Centre Regional Pour L'Afrique in Senegal, for Africa. Tel: (221) 254 914 Fax: (221) 254 914 E-Mail: panafric@sonatel.senet.net PAN AP in Penang, Malaysia, for Asia and the Pacific. Tel: (604) 657 0271/656 0381 Fax: (604) 675 7445. E-Mail: panap@panap.po.my The Pesticides Trust in London, England, for Europe. Tel: (44-171) 274 8895 Fax: (44-171) 274 9084. E-Mail: pesttrust@gn.apc.org Red de Accion en Alternativas al Uso de Agroquimicos (RAAA) in Lima, Peru, for Latin America. Tel: (51-1) 421 0826 Fax: (51-1) 440 4359. E-mail: rapalpe@mail.cosapidata.com.pe PAN North America (PANNA) in San Francisco, U.S.A, for North America. Tel: (1-415) 981 1771 Fax: (1-415) 981 1991. E-mail: Panna@econet.apc.org For more information do contact the regional centre nearest you. From mtachiba at jca.ax.apc.org Thu Dec 3 20:08:32 1998 From: mtachiba at jca.ax.apc.org (Tachibana Masahiko) Date: Thu, 3 Dec 1998 20:08:32 +0900 Subject: [asia-apec 937] Re: Press Release: Global "NO Pesticides Day" Launched (PAN-AP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: At 7:57 PM +0900 98.12.3, Tachibana Masahiko wrote: > Below is a mail failed to deliver because of the big graphic file > attached, which I deleted on this reposting. I have put this graphic file on my homepage. It is "jpeg" format of the poster for the "No Pesticide Use Day" campaingn, accessible by the following URL. http://www.jca.ax.apc.org/~mtachiba/panposter.jpg Tachibana Masahiko From cynth at pd.jaring.my Thu Dec 3 23:50:06 1998 From: cynth at pd.jaring.my (Cynthia Gabriel) Date: Thu, 03 Dec 1998 22:50:06 +0800 Subject: [asia-apec 938] [Fwd: Tian's Lockup letter Dec 1, 98] Message-ID: <3666A51D.6F92D6DF@pd.jaring.my> -------------- next part -------------- An embedded message was scrubbed... From: wkpeng@pc.jaring.my Subject: Tian's Lockup letter Dec 1, 98 Date: Thu, 03 Dec 1998 20:16:51 +0800 Size: 4589 Url: http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/private/asia-apec/attachments/19981203/931745ed/attachment.mht From gattwd at corso.ch.planet.gen.nz Fri Dec 4 13:36:51 1998 From: gattwd at corso.ch.planet.gen.nz (Gatt Watchdog) Date: Fri, 04 Dec 1998 16:36:51 +1200 Subject: [asia-apec 939] APEC Security Training Outrage at Auckland Uni Message-ID: <5N3yZe5w165w@corso.ch.planet.gen.nz> >From New Zealand Herald, Auckland, 4/12/98 Army training for Apec on varsity patch By Karen Burge Auckland University is under fire from some staff and student leaders for letting the Army use campus buildings for Apec security training. University heads said they had no problems with the military using several arts faculty buildings for search practices. But students and some staff said it clashed with the university's role as a haven for free speech. About 15 soldiers are believed to have been on campus this week. Last night a bomb disposal truck and other military vehicles were parked outside university buildings off Symonds St. Security guards barred access to the premises and said they had been told not to discuss what was going on. An Army spokeswoman, Sian Routledge, said the university had been selected not for what it was but because it had different types of buildings. Staff and students said the presence of the Army on campus in any form was both provocative and problematic. It went against the traditional place of universities as a refuge for those who are the "critics and conscience" of society. A staff member, who did not want to be named, said many members were unhappy about the Army activity, although most had not been informed it was taking place and had been given no chance to complain. The vice-president of the students' association, Larissa Wakim, said feeling among students was that the Army should "get off our space". A university spokesman, Bill Williams, said deans had been consulted on the decision and many staff reported they were very happy about the Army's presence. He said administrators did not see a problem as the Army did not have the oppressive reputation of armies internationally. The exercises would not take place during working hours. Larissa Wakim said the university and Army had quite different roles in society. "For the Army to be using our home base for training is disgusting and appalling, really." She said students and university staff were targeted by police and armed forces during international meetings because they were known protesters. The students' association offices were bugged during the Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting in 1995. She said it appeared the university cared more about extending goodwill to the Army than its own staff and students. Sian Routledge said the training would be useful for the Apec meeting in Auckland next year but it was not being done specifically for it. It was an "insurance policy" for New Zealanders' safety. Any suggestions that the Army was casing the university with an eye to quelling Apec protests were simply not true. Letters to the Editor of the NZ Herald can be sent to letters@herald.co.nz From jkellock at amnesty.org Fri Dec 4 22:50:58 1998 From: jkellock at amnesty.org (jkellock@amnesty.org) Date: Fri, 4 Dec 1998 13:50:58 +0000 Subject: [asia-apec 940] Job announcement - AMRC Message-ID: <802566D0.004C4040.00@fox.amnesty.org> Edited/Distributed by HURINet - The Human Rights Information Network --------------------------------------------------------------------- ## author : lanfran@YORKU.CA ## date : 24.11.98 --------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear friends, We are re-opening our ad for the post of editor/publications officer. We would very much appreciate it if you would pass on this message on to anyone who might be interested. ANNOUNCEMENT Job Opportunity at Asia Monitor Resource Center in Hong Kong AMRC is an independent non-governmental organization which focuses on Asian labor concerns. The center provides information, research, publishing, training, labor networking and related services to labor groups, trade unions and other development NGOs in the region. It has been based in Hong Kong for over 20 years. Publications Coordinator/Editor: AMRC is seeking an individual to fill the full time, program staff level position to be responsible for writing, planning and editing AMRC's publications, including the quarterly Asian Labor Update and other occasional papers and publications. Requirements: We are looking for an individual who is committed to the goals of AMRC with strong English writing skills, a strong foundation in labor related issues, experience in working with non-governmental organizations, labor groups, trade unions or other development groups as well as journalism and computer skills. Experience working in Asia and Asian language ability preferred. If you are interested in this position, or would like more information about AMRC, please send a cover letter and resume by December 10 to Apo Leong, Director, Asia Monitor Resource Center, 444 Nathan Road, 8-B, Kowloon, Hong Kong; fax: 852-2385-5319; tel: 852-2332-1346; email: amrc@hk.super.net. ------------------------------------------- ALARM Project, c/o AMRC 444 Nathan Road, 8-B Kowloon, Hong Kong T# +852 2332-1346 F# +852 2385-5319 ------------------------------------------- From quonset at aloha.com Sat Dec 5 03:19:41 1998 From: quonset at aloha.com (Malia Robinson/Roger Furrer) Date: Fri, 04 Dec 1998 08:19:41 -1000 Subject: [asia-apec 941] Re: Job Description Southeast Asia Actionaid In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19981201090236.007edae0@pop.qut.edu.au> Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.19981204081941.0079c7e0@aloha.com> Greetings Friends: I passed on this job description to a very qualified friend in Mindanao, however he noticed that there was no contact address in the text. To whom should he write, phone, or E-mail? Thanks for your prompt response. Roger Furrer, Makaha, Hawai`i. At 09:02 AM 12/1/98 +0000, you wrote: > >At 17:27 30/11/98 +0000, you wrote: >> >> >> >>Please pass on this information to anyone you think might be interested (NB >>applications from ASEAN citizens are encouraged): >> >>ActionAid Asia >>Terms of Reference for the Southeast Asia Programme Officer >> >>Introduction >>This follows the reports and recommendations of the Southeast Asia >>Appraisal exercise completed at the end of September 1998. This position of >>Southeast Asia Programme Officer , initially for a period of one year, has >>been created to move forward with enhancing and intensifying ActionAid;s >>work and engagement in the Southeast Asia. This position will be funded >>from general fund allocation for new country initiatives in the 1999 budget >>of Asia Regional Office. >> >>Terms of Reference >>The Southeast Asia Programme Officer will have the following broad >>responsibilities and tasks, which are in line with the recommendations of >>the Southeast Appraisal Report, for this period of employment: >> >>To carry out appraisal and make necessary arrangements to establish a >>sponsorship-based poverty focused partnership and programmes in >>Philippines. >>To accomplish further detailed country appraisals in Cambodia and >>Indonesia. >>To develop appropriate sub-regional project proposals (for partnership and >>fundraising) for at least 3 of the five following broad thematic issues >>recommended in the SEAsia Appraisal Report: >>Sustainable livelihood and food security >>HIV/AIDS >>NGO-CBO Capacity Strengthening >>Challenging economic growth-led models >>Micro-finance >>To further develop existing or initiate new appropriate partnership, >>association and alliance with regional and sub-regional organisations, >>network, fora and processes. >>To inform ActionAid Asia Regional Team regularly about the situations, >>events and trends related to poverty, development and key-player activities >>in the Southeast Asia sub-region. >>To participate and play an active role in the development of ActionAid's >>organisation and work in the Asia Region. >>To submit a detailed bi-monthly report to the line manager. >> >>Employment Conditions >> >>The successful candidate will have a high level of relevant analytical >>skills and experience related to poverty focused NGO programmes, networks >>and alliances. She or he will also have excellent inter-personal and >>communication skills. >>The successful candidate will be able to work from the location where she >>or he is currently located (provided it has good communication and >>transport links) in the Southeast Asia sub-region but a substantial travel >>particularly in the sub-region is a requirement of the job. >>A competitive salary and benefit package applicable to the conditions >>offered by international NGOs in the country will be offered. >>Further expansion of ActionAid's work in this region can lead this position >>to be converted into a longer-term appointment from the year 2000. >>The Southeast Asia Programme Officer will report to the Country Director of >>ActionAid Vietnam who has partial responsibility for development of >>ActionAid programmes and relations in the sub-region. >>ActionAid will consider taking people also on secondment from other >>organisation for this period of contract. >>Preference will be given to individuals who live in or come from and know >>about this sub-region well. >> >>30 November 1998. >> >> >> > > >Ross > > > VISIT MY HOME PAGES: http://arts.qut.edu.au/humanrights/ > > http://arts.qut.edu.au/AustraliaRight/ > > >ROSS DANIELS PHONE: [61] [7] 38644547 WK >LECTURER [61] [7] 33006530 HM >SCHOOL OF SOCIAL SCIENCE 0413760357 MOBILE >QUT FAX: [61] [7] 38644995 WK >BRISBANE, AUSTRALIA [61] [7] 33001279 HM > > From jkellock at amnesty.org Sat Dec 5 03:17:31 1998 From: jkellock at amnesty.org (jkellock@amnesty.org) Date: Fri, 4 Dec 1998 18:17:31 +0000 Subject: [asia-apec 942] Re: Job Description Southeast Asia Actionaid Message-ID: <802566D0.0064A79F.00@fox.amnesty.org> Try Annieh@actionaid.org.uk From rverzola at phil.gn.apc.org Sat Dec 5 06:08:07 1998 From: rverzola at phil.gn.apc.org (Roberto Verzola) Date: Sat, 05 Dec 1998 06:08:07 Subject: [asia-apec 943] flawed paradigm that led to the Y2K problem Message-ID: <199812052312.HAA05157@phil.gn.apc.org> This is my follow up message on the GKD list that relates the Y2K crisis with other crises that modern societies face today. I do hope NGOs and other groups manage to prepare early for the coming millennium crises, debates and soul-searching. Obet Verzola * Original is in : GKD * Original date : 30 Nov 98 22:17:01 * Original is by : rverzola (6:751/401.1) * Original is to : gkd@tristram.edc.org (6:751/401) * Full text below: This is my contribution to the paradigm debate: The flawed mindset that blinded a whole generation of designers and their employers to the Y2K problem is due to the adoption of efficiency (or what I prefer to call gain maximization) as the overriding criterion for economic decision-making. Efficiency probably got its biggest boost with Adam Smith, when he convinced everybody that an economic agent which maximizes its own gain is also maximizing gain for society as a whole, providing it with moral justification. Then it took off when we allowed in our laws the creation of a special kind of legal person, one which is not a confusing bundle of mixed motivations and emotions like a natural person is, but a person whose one and only motivation was to maximize its own gain. (I have suggested elsewhere that ecologists study this gain-maximizing legal person as if it were a separate species and see what insights we might derive from this fresh approach. Perhaps, we would find out that this "species" is in fact blindly transforming the world into its own "Gaia"?) Our lives took another turn for the worse as these pure agents of gain-maximization acquired increasing economic and political rights, protected by our laws, and as their power to create an environment more conducive to their survival and further growth expanded. (Note that this environment is not necessarily an environment that is likewise conducive to the survival, health and happiness of natural persons.) Using their acquired rights as foothold, these gain-maximizing agents gradually expanded their powers until they could disentangle themselves from suffocating social and legal restrictions. Later on, they even managed to take over many of functions originally reserved for others societal structures and institutions. Today, we are often ruled by these gain-maximizing agents more than we rule over their behavior. One effect of this relentless pursuit of efficiency is the breaking down of modular barriers which had earlier served to improve reliability and minimize risks. These were either economic barriers, cultural and linguistic barriers, territorial barriers, geographic barriers, and even biological barriers between species. Since breaking down these barriers increased gains and improved efficiency, broken down they were. There is enough in the theories of systems analysis and design to explain why this would increase the number of potential interactions in a system, and why the exponential increase in side-effects that this leads to, creates a system which is problem-ridden and failure-prone. Let us look beyond the M-bug at other global problems which threaten us and our environment: global warming, toxic proliferation (a superset of the tobacco problem), loss of habitats leading to massive species extinction, wealth concentration, etc. Behind these problems, we will usually find the visible hand of these pure agents of gain- maximization and the effects of loss of modularity due to their pursuit of efficiency. We would obviously find others flaws, in our search for deeply-flawed behavioral patterns within modern society, but I am prepared to argue that the gain-maximizing paradigm is truly a major one. If there is still time and space for more Y2K-related discussion on this list, my next post would be about alternatives to the efficiency and gain-maximizing paradigms. Regards to all, Roberto Verzola From tpl at cheerful.com Sun Dec 6 12:00:08 1998 From: tpl at cheerful.com (BAYAN) Date: Sun, 06 Dec 1998 11:00:08 +0800 Subject: [asia-apec 944] DECLARATION OF THE INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE AGAINST MINING TNCs Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.19981206110008.006f7ddc@pop.skyinet.net> >Date: Thu, 03 Dec 1998 18:30:23 +0800 >From: BAYAN > >Declaration of the International Conference Against >Transnational Mining Corporations >November 14-16, 1998 > > >We, representatives from people's organizations, non-governmental >organizations (NGOs), institutes, church and advocacy groups from 23 >countries in Asia, Latin America, Europe, North America and Australia, have >come together in this conference to face an old yet growing global threat - >the destructive evil that is large-scale, commercial mining by >transnational and domestic corporations. > >Although mining is as old as civilization itself, it is in the period of >crisis-ridden monopoly capitalism that we have experienced its most lethal >effects. At the heart of the problem is the control of the industry >primarily by transnational corporations (TNCs) whose greed for profits >knows no bounds. Value wise, mining is the world's fourth most important >industry today. But it is an industry where a few rake in billions at the >expense of the world's peoples and the environment. Under the aegis of >globalization, these mining TNCs have become more aggressive, cunning and >sophisticated in their worldwide plunder. > >The operation of mining TNCs are direct attacks on the rights of nations >and peoples -- especially workers, peasants, indigenous peoples and women -- >to self determination, genuine development, land and life itself. It is >synonymous with extensive land grabbing, irreversible and total destruction >of the environment, intensified exploitation of labor and the ruin of local >and indigenous cultures. Of the 8,000 or so mining sites being explored and >set up today, around half are in the territories of indigenous peoples. > >Mining also means armed, state-sponsored violence and the systematic and >widespread violation of human and people's rights in the economic, >political and socio-cultural spheres (including gender and race). It is >common practice for mining TNCs to use the military and mercenary forces, >as well as local para-military groups, to divide and coerce communities >into submission. They also employ bribery, pseudo development projects and >other soft approaches for this purpose. > >Mining TNCs do not work alone. They act in connivance with governments that >serve as their conduits. Modern day imperialist and neocolonial states are >the most effective weapons of mining TNCs. By promulgating pro-TNC laws and >policies, forging bilateral and multilateral agreements, and enforcing >these through deception and coercion, governments serve as willing tools of >the monopoly capitalist onslaught. > >Multilateral agencies like the United Nations (UN), International Monetary >Fund (IMF), World Bank (WB), World Trade Organization (WTO), and >Organization on Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD); regional trade >blocs like the North American Free Trade Association (NAFTA), Europeran >Union and the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC); and their gamut of >international agreements like the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade >(GATT) and the proposed Multilateral Agreement on Investments (MAI); >aggresively promote the neoliberal dogma of globalization, giving mining >TNCs, other monopoly enterprises and their governments even greater power >to plunder whole economies. Their social clauses and codes of conduct make >mining TNCs appear benign and are used merely to appease or confuse those >who raise concerns about mining. > >Mining TNCs, governments and multilateral agencies have even formed their >own NGOs, or coopted some, including a number of scientists and academics, >into supporting claims of corporate responsibility, environmental safety >and community development. These opportunists receive huge grants and >donations for their deodorizing efforts. > >The right of nations and peoples to chart their own destinies, use the land >and its resources for the common good, and live in peace, dignity and >health are at the heart of our opposition to the capitalist mining >corporations. People, not corporations and profits, should be at the center >of things. > > With the people in control, the utilization of mineral resources can be >directed to satisfy social needs, not corporate greed. The peasants' >ownership of land, the indigenous people's claim to ancestral domain, and >the interest of the workers will be respected. Destructive mining >operations and technologies will be discarded and replaced with those that >give a premium to the health and environmental concerns of society. > > But we cannot effectively resist and oppose mining TNCs, nor give control >to the people, if we do not resist and oppose imperialist economic >policies, military agreements and atrocities, and cultures of decadence and >greed. These measures, born of the crisis of the global capitalist system >itself, have in fact plunged entire nations to unparalleled levels of >poverty and oppression. > > Our peoples can and have used various means and venues of resistance -- >from legal actions, parliamentary, struggles to militant mass actions and >revolutionary armed struggles -- to advance our cause. Clearly, it is in >militant and concerted mass actions where we have found and proven the >inherent power of the people in forging meaningful change. We should >continue to arouse the people's interest on the issues of mining and >globalization, organize and mobilize them towards militant struggle. > > In this light, engaging TNCs in official national and international venues >and processes must not fall into the trap of deception and collaboration. >These processes cannot and should not be principally relied on in our >struggle against mining TNCs. > > We have to link grassroots and national struggles with those of oppressed >nations and peoples all over the world. International solidarity actions >and coordinated activities or campaigns are integral to this worldwide >endeavor. > > Lastly, we pay homage to the martyrs and heroes of the resistance. Their >sacrifices have not been in vain. There have been many victories to >celebrate, and many more to attain in our struggle. > >We are united on the following calls: > >* Prosecute and punish the mining TNCs and their accomplices for their wide >scale plunder and destruction. Indemnify the victims, rehabilitate the >communities and restore the environment; >* Immediately close down open pit and other destructive, large-scale mining >operations. Prevent the further entry and operations of mining TNCs. >Phase-out existing TNC mines, making sure displaced workers are properly >compensated and the environment is restored. Place the industry in the >hands and in the service of the people; >* Denounce and resist the militarization of communities and other >repressive measures employed by mining TNCs and governments; >* Reject the various deceptive schemes such as codes of conduct and health >and environment standards intended to disorient and disarm the people and >legitimize the operation of mining TNCs. Expose deceptive NGOs formed, >funded and supported by mining TNCs and governments. >* Reject liberalization, privatization, deregulation and other structural >adjustment policies of the IMF/WB and its client states. Stop foreign debt >payments, repudiate fraudulent loans and reject IMF-crafted Letters of Intent; >* Resist the efforts of OECD countries to incorporate the MIA and similar >neoliberal agendas in any international forum; > > We have come from various places and various persuasions. But we are all >united in this urgent fight for land and life, justice, dignity and >liberation. > --------------------------------------------------------- > B A Y A N > Bagong Alyansang Makabayan or New Patriotic Alliance > No. 23 Maamo Street, Sikatuna Village > Quezon City, PHILIPPINES > Telephone: (63-2) 435-9151 Telefax: (63-2) 922-5211 > Email: > Bayan webpage URL: > http://www.bigfoot.com/~bayan-phils > ----------------------------------------------------------- > From tpl at cheerful.com Sun Dec 6 12:04:39 1998 From: tpl at cheerful.com (BAYAN) Date: Sun, 06 Dec 1998 11:04:39 +0800 Subject: [asia-apec 945] Chossudovsky on Speculating Against the Canadian Dollar Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.19981206110439.006f7ddc@pop.skyinet.net> >From: Michel Chossudovsky > > SPECULATING AGAINST THE CANADIAN DOLLAR > > by > > Michel Chossudovsky > > >Professor of Economics, University of Ottawa, author of The Globalisation >of Poverty, Impacts of IMF and World Bank Reforms, Third World Network, >Penang and Zed Books, London, 1997. (The book can be ordered from >twn@igc.apc.org) > >Copyright by Michel Chossudovsky Ottawa 1998. All rights reserved. To >publish or reproduce this text, contact the author at fax: 1-514-4256224, >email: chossudovsky@sprint.ca > > >The tumble of the Canadian dollar has been casually ascribed by politicians >and financial analysts alike to the "Asian flu" and "the associated >downward pressure on the prices of the primary commodities that Canada >exports".1 Yet Canada's primary exports account for less than one percent >of total forex transactions, -- ie. "a drop in the Ocean", a meagre Can$337 >million out of a total daily turnover of 55.4 billion dollars of which more >than 90 percent is speculative in nature.2 > >Canadian Banks speculate against the Canadian Dollar > >The public has been blatantly misled. The official justification for the >dollar's decline does not stand up; it fails to address the workings of >foreign exchange markets. The speculative wave which has swept the World's >currency markets is not limited to the former "Asian tigers". It has also >struck several Western countries including Canada. > >Bay Street has joined the speculative bandwagon. Canadian financial >institutions including the chartered banks are routinely involved in >speculating against the Canadian dollar. The amounts of money transacted by >these institutions (using the gamut of speculative instruments) are >staggering: more than Can$55.4 billion (US$36 billion) are transacted daily >through Canada's foreign exchange market, --ie. thirty two times the >amounts paid to Canadians in the form of wages and salaries. > >Of this multibillion dollar turnover, a meagre Can$2.5 billion (US$1.6 >billion) constitute bona fide merchandise trade.3 And 97 percent of forex >turnover is conducted in relation to the US dollar indicating the extent to >which Canadian banks are part of the US financial landscape. > >Some 36 Canadian financial institutions including the chartered banks, >trust companies, brokerage houses and foreign exchange dealers, are the >main actors in the speculative assaults on the Canadian dollar. Only a >fraction of this business is undertaken on behalf of the clients of >Canadian financial institutions.4 > >The loonie has been transformed into "the northern peso": the same deadly >instruments used to destabilise national currencies in Asia and Latin >America, have been routinely used by Canadian and American financial >institutions in their assault against the Canadian dollar. > >Assaulting the Vaults of the Central Bank > >The implications are far-reaching. The speculative attacks against the >Canadian dollar have led to the demise of monetary policy. Politicians have >failed to acknowledge the existence of currency speculation and its deadly >impact. The devaluation is seen as a blessing in disguise: a weaker dollar >is said to contribute to job creation. Countervailing measures to avert the >slide were not taken, let alone the imposition of a "code of conduct" on >Canadian financial institutions. Political inertia provided an unequivocal >"green light" to speculators. > >The surge of speculative activity against the Canadian Dollar has resulted >in a dramatic drain of Canada's foreign exchange reserves. In recent >months, the Bank of Canada has entered into multibillion dollar contracts >in the forex market in a failed attempt to prop up the nation's currency: >the vaults of the Bank of Canada have been assaulted by Canadian and >American speculators; billions of dollars of Canada's central bank reserves >have been transferred into private financial hands. > >Wall Street Creditors to the Rescue of the Bank of Canada > >"Bail-outs" by global creditors do not solely apply to Mexico, Korea or >Indonesia. Heavily indebted as a result of its failed attempts to prop up >the loonie, the Bank of Canada was obliged to renegotiate a US 6 billion >"bail-out" (9.2 billion Canadian dollars) with a syndicate of Wall Street >banks (including Chase Manhattan, Citigroup, Morgan Guarantee Trust, Credit >Suisse First Boston). Politely labelled in the banking jargon as "a standby >credit facility", the bailout is intended to restock the Bank of Canada's >foreign currency reserves.5 The Central Bank (defined in our banking system >as the "Lender of Last Resort") is obliged to replenish its reserves on >borrowed money, an absurd situation. > >The Demise of Monetary Policy > >In the present context, the "lenders of last resort" are the Wall Street >creditors of the Bank of Canada. Since 1991, reserve requirements have been >lifted, the commercial banking sector (rather than the Bank of Canada) >fully controls money creation. In other words, privately held money >reserves in the hands of Canadian and US financial institutions far exceed >the limited capabilities of the Bank of Canada. Together with Canada's >largest chartered banks, Wall Street ultimately "calls the shots". The >banks --through speculative trade-- have triggered the tumble of the >Canadian dollar and the demise of monetary policy. > >Ironically, the same institutions which contributed to weakening the >Canadian dollar have been called in --under the standby arrangement-- to >help the Bank of Canada prop up the loonie on "borrowed forex reserves". >The latter constitute a large share of Canada's central bank reserves. > >Speculation against the Canadian dollar marks the demise of central banking >and the inability of the federal government through the Bank of Canada to >control money creation on behalf of society. This signifies that monetary >policy is in the hands of the Bank of Canada's Wall street creditors. > >Using the Budget Surplus to reimburse the Speculators > >The modest budget surplus of 3.5 billion dollars (fiscal year 1997-98) >announced by the Minister of Finance in October will barely suffice to >service the Bank of Canada's outstanding debt with Wall Street which has >resulted from the short-term speculative assault on the Canadian dollar. No >doubt, the government is also anxious to use part of the surpluses of the >employment insurance scheme to reimburse the Bank of Canada's Wall Street >creditors. > >The Federal Reserve Bank of Toronto? > >What is the future of central banking? With its hard currency reserves >depleted, the Bank of Canada may become (in the not too distant future) a >mere "currency board" in which the Canadian dollar would be pegged (eg. in >a two to one split) to the US dollar. Alternatively, the loonie would be >withdrawn altogether; Canadian prices and wages would be converted into US >currency. The loonie would be replaced by the greenback and the Bank of >Canada would become a mere appendage of the US monetary system: the 13th >regional Reserve Bank of the Federal Reserve system of which Canada's >chartered banks would become the stockholders. > > * * * > > Notes > >1 Bank of Canada, Press Release, "Bank Rate Raised by 1 Percentage Point", >27 August 1998. > >2. Bank of Canada, Survey of Foreign Exchange and Derivatives Markets in >Canada, Press Release, 29 September 1998. For commodity trade figures see >Statistics Canada, Merchandise Trade of Canada, Ottawa, October 1998; trade >figures are for August 1998. According to Statistics Canada, Gross Domestic >Product at market prices was 876.1 billion (seasonally adjusted at annual >rates, second quarter 1998). According to Bank of Canada data, total forex >turnover is of the order of Can$1189 billion a month (US$773 billion) or >14.3 trillion per annum, --ie. 16.3 times Canada's Gross Domestic Product >at market prices. > >3. Ibid. > >4. Bank of Canada, Survey of Foreign Exchange and Derivatives, op. cit. > >5. Bank of Canada, Press Release, 2 September 1998. > > > Michel Chossudovsky > > Department of Economics, > University of Ottawa, > Ottawa, K1N6N5 > > Voice box: 1-613-562-5800, ext. 1415 > Fax: 1-514-425-6224 > E-Mail: chossudovsky@sprint.ca > >http://www.voicenet.co.jp/~friede/ines/special/fwar_frm.htm >http://www.interlog.com/~cjazz/chossd.htm >http://www.heise.de/tp/english/special/eco/ >http://heise.xlink.de/tp/english/special/eco/6099/1.html#anchor1 > From tpl at cheerful.com Sun Dec 6 12:38:42 1998 From: tpl at cheerful.com (tpl@cheerful.com) Date: Sun, 06 Dec 1998 11:38:42 +0800 Subject: [asia-apec 946] FYI: International Campaign Against US-Phil Visiting Forces Agreement (VFA) Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.19981206113842.006f7960@pop.skyinet.net> >From: GABRIELA >From: GABRIELA Network - U.S.A. >> >> >>NEW PHILIPPINE-US MILITARY AGREEMENT OPENS >>ARCHIPELAGO TO GREATER EXPLOITATION, HUMAN >>RIGHTS VIOLATION AND SEX TRAFFICKING >> >> >>Where in the world can the United States bring in any number of >>military and civilian personnel through any airport or harbor at any time >>without passport and visa? Where can an American commit the most >>heinous crime with impunity, so long as the US military commander issues >>a certificate stating that such "arises out of an act or omission done >>in the performance of official duty?" >> >>What country in the world automatically and ipso facto waives "any and >>all claims... for damage, loss or destruction to property ... or for >>death or injury to military and civilian personnel?" >> >>These are the intolerable provisions of the Visiting Forces Agreement (VFA), >>signed by the Philippine Secretary of Foreign Affairs and the US >>Ambassador to the Philippines last February 10, 1998. It was a >>"midnight act" of the outgoing administration of former President, >>Marcos crony General Fidel V. Ramos, a West Point Academy graduate. >> >>GABRIELA Network, a Philippine-US women's solidarity organization, asks >>all Americans to contact their Congressional representatives, both in >>the lower and upper house, to register their opposition to this virtual >>re-colonization and US military occupation of the Philippines. The >>people and the nation of that archipelago have already been much-imposed >>upon, subjected to a hundred year struggle against the dominance and >>control of the United States. >> >>The US military's record, for the nearly 50 years after WWII that it was >>in the Philippines, stands as follows: >>1] almost a million women enticed into the sex trade developed by the >>US military authority ; >>2] some 60,000 children abandoned by their American soldier-fathers; >>3] HIV/AIDS entered the Philippines through the bases; >>4] dumped "low-level" radioactive wastes into the Pacific waters; >>5] "accidentally" killed and maimed Filipinos, "mistaking" them for >>wild boars; >>6] killed and maimed women and children for "rest-and-recreation" >>pleasures. >> >>Enough is enough. There is no need for additional US military bases; >>indeed, there is a need to reduce if not remove all US bases in the >>Pacific. The US military has bases in Guam, South Korea, Taiwan, Japan >>and Palau. The Visiting Forces Agreement is an unnecessary expense, >>which will cut into the social programs for the poor in the United >>States. >> >>It is also morally and ethically wrong. The Filipino people have fought >>against continued US dominance, especially US military dominance, within >>its national territory. They have undergone an epic suffering, much of >>which has gone unrecorded and unremarked upon by the American people. >>We must put a stop to the battering and the stalking of this nation and >>people by our own military. >> >>On this hundredth year anniversary of the Philippine-American war, >>during which the archipelago lost 1/8th of its population, the American >>people has the opportunity to correct a historic wrong. And the >>American people can do so simply by exercising their democratic right to >>have control over foreign affairs and diplomatic decisions made by their >>own government. >> >>Please demand of the US Congress that the Visiting Forces Agreement >>entered into by the United States with the Philippines be terminated >>immediately. Please send the same message to the Philippine government, >>which is under the erroneous impression that no one cares about the >>Filipino people on this side of the Pacific. Send your objections to: >> >> President Joseph Estrada >> Malacanang Palace >> Manila, Philippines >> >>Please send us a copy at gabnet@gabnet.org or GABNet, PO Box 403, Times >>Square Station, New York, NY 10036. From quonset at aloha.com Sun Dec 6 15:04:21 1998 From: quonset at aloha.com (Malia Robinson/Roger Furrer) Date: Sat, 05 Dec 1998 20:04:21 -1000 Subject: [asia-apec 947] Re: Job Description Southeast Asia Actionaid In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.19981204081941.0079c7e0@aloha.com> References: <3.0.32.19981201090236.007edae0@pop.qut.edu.au> Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.19981205200421.007ad710@aloha.com> At 08:19 AM 12/4/98 -1000, you wrote: > >Greetings Friends: > >I passed on this job description to a very qualified friend in Mindanao, >however he noticed that there was no contact address in the text. To whom >should he write, phone, or E-mail? > >Thanks for your prompt response. > >Roger Furrer, >Makaha, Hawai`i. > >At 09:02 AM 12/1/98 +0000, you wrote: >> >>At 17:27 30/11/98 +0000, you wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>Please pass on this information to anyone you think might be interested (NB >>>applications from ASEAN citizens are encouraged): >>> >>>ActionAid Asia >>>Terms of Reference for the Southeast Asia Programme Officer >>> >>>Introduction >>>This follows the reports and recommendations of the Southeast Asia >>>Appraisal exercise completed at the end of September 1998. This position of >>>Southeast Asia Programme Officer , initially for a period of one year, has >>>been created to move forward with enhancing and intensifying ActionAid;s >>>work and engagement in the Southeast Asia. This position will be funded >>>from general fund allocation for new country initiatives in the 1999 budget >>>of Asia Regional Office. >>> >>>Terms of Reference >>>The Southeast Asia Programme Officer will have the following broad >>>responsibilities and tasks, which are in line with the recommendations of >>>the Southeast Appraisal Report, for this period of employment: >>> >>>To carry out appraisal and make necessary arrangements to establish a >>>sponsorship-based poverty focused partnership and programmes in >>>Philippines. >>>To accomplish further detailed country appraisals in Cambodia and >>>Indonesia. >>>To develop appropriate sub-regional project proposals (for partnership and >>>fundraising) for at least 3 of the five following broad thematic issues >>>recommended in the SEAsia Appraisal Report: >>>Sustainable livelihood and food security >>>HIV/AIDS >>>NGO-CBO Capacity Strengthening >>>Challenging economic growth-led models >>>Micro-finance >>>To further develop existing or initiate new appropriate partnership, >>>association and alliance with regional and sub-regional organisations, >>>network, fora and processes. >>>To inform ActionAid Asia Regional Team regularly about the situations, >>>events and trends related to poverty, development and key-player activities >>>in the Southeast Asia sub-region. >>>To participate and play an active role in the development of ActionAid's >>>organisation and work in the Asia Region. >>>To submit a detailed bi-monthly report to the line manager. >>> >>>Employment Conditions >>> >>>The successful candidate will have a high level of relevant analytical >>>skills and experience related to poverty focused NGO programmes, networks >>>and alliances. She or he will also have excellent inter-personal and >>>communication skills. >>>The successful candidate will be able to work from the location where she >>>or he is currently located (provided it has good communication and >>>transport links) in the Southeast Asia sub-region but a substantial travel >>>particularly in the sub-region is a requirement of the job. >>>A competitive salary and benefit package applicable to the conditions >>>offered by international NGOs in the country will be offered. >>>Further expansion of ActionAid's work in this region can lead this position >>>to be converted into a longer-term appointment from the year 2000. >>>The Southeast Asia Programme Officer will report to the Country Director of >>>ActionAid Vietnam who has partial responsibility for development of >>>ActionAid programmes and relations in the sub-region. >>>ActionAid will consider taking people also on secondment from other >>>organisation for this period of contract. >>>Preference will be given to individuals who live in or come from and know >>>about this sub-region well. >>> >>>30 November 1998. >>> >>> >>> >> >> >>Ross >> >> >> VISIT MY HOME PAGES: http://arts.qut.edu.au/humanrights/ >> >> http://arts.qut.edu.au/AustraliaRight/ >> >> >>ROSS DANIELS PHONE: [61] [7] 38644547 WK >>LECTURER [61] [7] 33006530 HM >>SCHOOL OF SOCIAL SCIENCE 0413760357 MOBILE >>QUT FAX: [61] [7] 38644995 WK >>BRISBANE, AUSTRALIA [61] [7] 33001279 HM >> >> > > From quonset at aloha.com Sun Dec 6 15:04:56 1998 From: quonset at aloha.com (Malia Robinson/Roger Furrer) Date: Sat, 05 Dec 1998 20:04:56 -1000 Subject: [asia-apec 948] Re: Job Description Southeast Asia Actionaid In-Reply-To: <802566D0.0064A79F.00@fox.amnesty.org> Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.19981205200456.007aca70@aloha.com> At 06:17 PM 12/4/98 +0000, you wrote: > > > >Try Annieh@actionaid.org.uk > > > > From rverzola at phil.gn.apc.org Sun Dec 6 18:06:12 1998 From: rverzola at phil.gn.apc.org (Roberto Verzola) Date: Sun, 06 Dec 1998 18:06:12 Subject: [asia-apec 949] Y2K approaches Message-ID: <199812071025.SAA02663@phil.gn.apc.org> I sent this message ahead of the Y2K/paradigm shift posting, but it did not come out, so I'm sending it again. It is a message I posted at the Global Knowledge for Development (GKD) list, but which should be relevant to any group that is talking about "crisis" and "transformation". -- Obet Verzola * Original is in : GKD * Original date : 28 Nov 98 05:02:29 * Original is by : rverzola (6:751/401.1) * Original is to : gkd@tristram.edc.org (6:751/401) * Full text below: I had earlier noted that a debate was brewing on this list on the approach to the Millennium Bug. At least 2 approaches are possible (they are somewhat mutually exclusive, I believe): * BUSINESS AS USUAL: let's solve the problem and get on with it. This approach basically looks at the M-bug as an atypical case of misjudgment or perhaps temporary insanity, when a whole generation of designers lost their bearings entirely and happened to commit exactly the same blunder. Not a very plausible explanation, I think. * SYSTEMIC REFORM: let's identify the deeply-flawed thinking processes behind the M-bug, which are probably the root cause of our other problems elsewhere, and use the crisis to initiate a thoughtfully planned process of discrediting and replacing these flawed thinking processes (I used the term "paradigm shift" earlier; "systemic reform" may sound less pompous to some). The responses I received were near-unanimous in wanting to listen to what the second approach has to say. I'll pursue this approach then: We know that civilization is facing other serious problems: * The tobacco problem alone probably causes more deaths each year than what the M-bug will cause over the lifetime of the problem * Ominous climatic changes which are threatening, among other things, our food production systems; * Nearly 50% drop in sperm counts worldwide over several decades, which is apparently caused by ubiquitous chemicals of which millions of tons are spewed by industry per year and which have also been blamed for cancers and widespread mutations among the susceptible * New threats posed by the environmental release and commercialization of potentially harmful genetically-engineered organisms. Radioactivity and toxic chemicals at least eventually dissipate; runaway engineered mutants reproduce, multiply, mutate and evolve. * The emergence of superviruses and antibiotic-resistant pathogens * Persistent and worsening poverty, amidst extreme concentration of wealth * I could go on and on, but you get the idea... My hypothesis is that the same deeply-flawed behavioral rules which rendered designers blind to their Y2K blunder are also keeping other planners today blind to the blunders enumerated above. WHAT COULD THESE DEEPLY-FLAWED THINKING PATTERNS BE? I do have my own ideas, but I'd like to invite all participants on this list to pool together our collective wisdom and to exert our utmost to recognize these deeply-flawed thinking patterns and behavioral rules. The moderators have offered to open a separate list to pursue this "systemic reform" approach. I do welcome the offer, although it would be nicer if we could actually continue the thread on the GKD list itself, rather than split up from the main body of participants. The turn of the millennium will see at least three global phenomena peaking: 1) the Y2K problem; 2) millennarian and related movements (the Catholic Church, for instance, has declared 2000 a jubillee year--very significant!); and 3) the global financial crisis. We can expect waves of universal soul-searching to envelop the land throughout this period. My hope is that we can together identify those deep-seated flaws in our thinking patterns and behavioural rules, and initiate the beginnings of a thoughtfully-planned process of reprogramming them. Then perhaps we can start a counter-flow that can eventually cause a titanic shift of direction away from the looming ecological disasters ahead towards a future of ensured survival, sufficiency, and sustainability. Regards to all, Roberto Verzola From gattwd at corso.ch.planet.gen.nz Mon Dec 7 06:57:27 1998 From: gattwd at corso.ch.planet.gen.nz (Gatt Watchdog) Date: Mon, 07 Dec 1998 09:57:27 +1200 Subject: [asia-apec 950] APEC 99: Pinochet survivor decries police 'harassment' Message-ID: >From New Zealand Herald, Auckland, 5-6 December 1998 Pinochet survivor decries police 'harassment' by Warren Gamble A former Chilean political prisoner says he is sick of being harassed as a potential threat by Auckland police preparing a massive security operation for next year's Apec conference. Esteban Espinoza, who has lived in Auckland for 17 years after surviving kidnapping and torture under the regime of General Augusto Pinochet, fears other refugees with strong political opinions will also be singled out. Police say they had been conducting a "comprehensive assessment of potential threats" for each of the 20 Apec delegations meeting in Auckland next September. Mr Espinoza said two police visits in the past three months were an invasion of his and his family's privacy. They follow six previous police checks on him since 1983, including one in 1985 when detectives told him they had information that he was planning to shoot the Pope at Auckland Airport. Mr Espinoza said the suggestion was laughable. It was partly his work for the Catholic Church in Chile which saw him jailed after a student protest, and later kidnapped and given electric shocks by military death squads. The two most recent police visits, including one to his 73-year-old mother who does not speak English, follow his public statements supporting the arrest of General Pinochet in London. In the second visit last month, an Auckland officer identifying himself as part of the threat assessment team for next year's Apec summit visited him at home. Mr Espinoza said the officer asked him about his plans for the conference, but he said he did not have any. As president of the Auckland Latin American community he was also quizzed about another Chilean, and Peruvians who might also be planning protests. Mr Espinoza said he knew of no such plans and told the officer that police should do their own work. The 39-year-old said he had never taken up arms, and had committed no offences in New Zealand. "I don't feel like the shadows which took me away from my home in 1980 should have followed me for 17 years," he said. "To me, this is harassment. I have been singled out because I was outspoken about Chile's problems." The Apec police commander, Superintendent Peter Marshall, said it would be remiss of police not to get a comprehensive overview of potential Apec threats in what was the country's largest security operation. That meant speaking to "appropriately placed people who may or may not indicate the levels of protest or problems in relation to individual delegations". Alliance MP Matt Robson called for a full report to Parliament on the police assessment activities to ensure they were not intimidatory or discriminatory. Letters to the editor: letters@herald.co.nz From rverzola at phil.gn.apc.org Mon Dec 7 06:38:36 1998 From: rverzola at phil.gn.apc.org (Roberto Verzola) Date: Mon, 07 Dec 1998 06:38:36 Subject: [asia-apec 951] new list on y2k / global financial crisis Message-ID: <199812072257.GAA00976@phil.gn.apc.org> LIST NAME: Interdoc-Y2K LIST OWNER: Interdoc is a loose international network of non-government organizations (NGOs) and advocacy groups who are monitoring recent information and communications technologies (ICT) for their social impact on ordinary citizens and developing countries. The Interdoc coordinator is Roberto Verzola from the Philippines. Interdoc members keep in touch by email and meet every few years or so to discuss issues face-to-face, do training, and conduct planning. Roberto Verzola will moderate the Interdoc-Y2K list. LIST DESCRIPTION: Interdoc-Y2K is a moderated list that continues the Y2K discussions on the World Bank-sponsored Global Knowledge for Development (GKD) list, which were held Nov. 5-30, 1998. Roberto Verzola was part of the panel of three experts who led the GKD discussions. A major GKD thread raised concerns about how the Y2K problem can aggravate the global financial crisis and therefore cause more serious disruptions than originally expected. To avoid a cascade of problems, the "modularization" approach was proposed, whose prescriptions ran against the present paradigm of "globalization". This led to a discussion about a paradigm shift that may be initiated by the crisis triggered by the Millennium Bomb. Thus, a debate about two approaches to the Y2K problem emerged: * BUSINESS AS USUAL: Let's solve the problem and get on with it. This approach basically looks at the M-bug as an atypical case of misjudgment or perhaps temporary insanity, when a whole generation of designers lost their bearings entirely and happened to commit exactly the same blunder. * SYSTEMIC REFORM: Let's identify the deeply-flawed technological and economic thinking behind the M-bug, which are probably the root cause of our other problems elsewhere. In the universal soul-searching that will surely be caused by the crisis, let's initiate a thoughtfully planned process of discrediting and replacing these flawed thinking and behavioral patterns (the term "paradigm shift" was earlier; "systemic reform" may sound less pompous to some). The Interdoc-Y2K list was created to continue discussion on the second approach. If you are interested in the details of the "business as usual" approach, please note that this will be a small issue on this list, which will concentrate on the "systemic reform" approach to the M-bomb. Please address your questions about this list to Roberto Verzola . SUBSCRIBING TO THE LIST: To subscribe, send a message to majordomo@jca.ax.apc.org and in the body of your message (not the subject), put the line: subscribe interdoc-y2k POSTING A MESSAGE: To post a message to the list, address your message to: interdoc-y2k@jca.ax.apc.org. UNSUBSCRIBING FROM THE LIST: To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@jca.ax.apc.org and in the body of your message (not the subject), put the line: unsubscribe interdoc-y2k From panap at panap.po.my Mon Dec 7 11:38:08 1998 From: panap at panap.po.my (PAN Asia Pacific) Date: Mon, 07 Dec 1998 11:38:08 Subject: [asia-apec 952] TIAN CHUA FREED!: 5 Dec 1998 (fwd) Message-ID: <3301@panap.po.my> FORWARDED MAIL ------- From: wkpeng@pc.jaring.my Date: 05 Dec 98 Originally To: sttm@rocketmail.com TIAN CHUA FREED!: 5 Dec 1998 Tian Chua was freed today on police bail as the AG Chambers have yet to consider charges against him. This means that he may be charged at a later date. He will be reporting to the Petaling Jaya Police HQ on Dec 19th, to find out if he will be charged. We would like to thank all the friends and well-wishers who had been "vigil-ing" and singing outside the police station in the last 2 weeks. We would especially like to thank all our friends from various human rights and trade unions who had responded intensively to our urgent appeal. Your faxes and demos have made a tremendous impact in favour of Tian's cases. We will update you further as soon as there are any developments. ----------------------------------------------------------- SUARA RAKYAT MALAYSIA (SUARAM) struggling for human rights in Malaysia add: 11, Jalan 1A/71E, Jalan Carey, 46000 Petaling Jaya, Selangor, Malaysia tel: 60-3-7943525 fax: 7943526 email: suaram@geocities.com, wkpeng@pc.jaring.my website:http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Lobby/1577 From gattwd at corso.ch.planet.gen.nz Mon Dec 7 16:48:14 1998 From: gattwd at corso.ch.planet.gen.nz (Gatt Watchdog) Date: Mon, 07 Dec 1998 19:48:14 +1200 Subject: [asia-apec 953] Re: NOTICE from system administrator In-Reply-To: <19981019050646X.yukihiro@klact.co.jp> Message-ID: <4iV5Ze2w165w@corso.ch.planet.gen.nz> Dear friends I'm writing on behalf of the Aotearoa/New Zealand APEC Monitoring Group as we would like to see the asia-apec listserve continue through 1999 so that it can continue to be a place for APEC-related information to be shared. We are currently setting up a website, but we hope that the asia-apec listserve would be able to continue in the same form that it is now. Hope to hear from you about this Aziz Choudry From panap at panap.po.my Mon Dec 7 15:45:58 1998 From: panap at panap.po.my (PAN Asia Pacific) Date: Mon, 07 Dec 1998 15:45:58 Subject: [asia-apec 954] APEC Food System: Hard to swallow Message-ID: <3305@panap.po.my> The 1998 Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) Leaders Statement says, "we also welcome the recommendations by ABAC and instruct our Ministers to study ABAC's proposals, including the APEC Food System." THE APEC FOOD SYSTEM: WHAT THE HELL IS THAT? I first heard about the "APEC Food System" in August in a speech by the New Zealand Minister for International Trade. Supposedly, the Food System will be high on New Zealand’s agenda for APEC next year. Originally, I thought that the Food System may have emerged from the APEC conference on Food, Energy, and the Environment (FEEEP) held last year in Canada, which APEC and government officials like to speak about as an example of successful NGO engagement with APEC. Evidently, this is not the case. In September, I asked a member of the APEC Secretariat about the Food System. She said she knew little about the Food System, only that it was originally proposed by a single American corporation. She said that this was how things often happen in APEC. So much for FEEEP! It reveals a lot about APEC that something so unknown, could make its way onto the Leaders’ Statement within a few months of its proposal. When I asked the Canadian Minister of Foreign Affairs and the Minister of International Trade about it on November 13, 1998 (just days before the Leaders’ Meeting), both said they’d never heard of it. Out of nowhere, the development of an APEC Food System became one of the APEC Business Advisory Council's (ABAC) key recommendations in its 1998 report to APEC Leaders. Well, not exactly. As it turns out, the APEC Food System is the strategic work of some of the largest TNCs of the agribusiness industry and its major promoters, including the US Department of Agriculture (USDA). AGRIBUSINESS TNCs INVADE APEC Non-governmental organisations are rarely permitted to participate within APEC, and, when they do, their input is limited and their recommendations are given little consideration. For TNCs, however, APEC gives them direct access to the leaders and senior officials through various channels. One of those channels is the Pacific Economic Cooperation Council (PECC). It claims to be "the only nongovernmental organization among the three official APEC observers. PECC representatives attend APEC Ministerial Meetings, Senior Official Meetings, and working group meetings." PECC strongly influences ABAC's recommendations as well. In November, PECC presented its "Pacific Food Outlook: 1998-1999" to the APEC Leaders in Kuala Lumpur. The sponsors for the Food Outlook include Rabobank International, the Farm Foundation, Cargill Asia Pacific Ltd., Colombian Coffee Federation, Danone Group, the Economic Research Service of the US Department of Agriculture, I-Mei Foods, National Pork Producers Council (USA), Winrock International, and World Perspectives Inc. Carole Bookins is the Chair of PECC's Food and Agriculture Forum. She is also the CEO of World Perspectives Inc.(WPI), one of the Food Outlook’s sponsors. WPI offers consultation services to the American agribusiness industry. Currently, it is developing a project called International Food Strategies in partnership with True North Communications—the sixth largest advertising corporation in the world and masterminds of the "Milk Mustache" and "Pork: The Other White Meat" campaigns. Before founding WPI in 1980, Bookins was the VP of the Commodities Department of E.F. Hutton and Co. in New York. She is currently a member of the board of Terra Industries (a US agrochemical corporation) and Winrock International (another of the PECC sponsors). She also has very close ties with the USDA. She is a member of the US State Department Advisory Committee on International Economic Policy and was appointed by US President Bush to the President’s Export Council. Furthermore, WPI’s Executive VP, Gary Blumenthal was Special Assistant to Bush for Agriculture Trade and Food Assistance from 1991-1993 and Chief of Staff to the Secretary of Agriculture during the same period. WPI’s President, Robert Kohlmeyer, before joining WPI, worked for 36 years with Cargill, one of the largest agribusiness companies in the world and another sponsor of PECC’s Outlook. During his time with Cargill, Kohlmeyer was a key agriculture adviser for the US. He was deeply involved in the 1972 US-USSR grain trade negotiations, also known as the Great Grain Robbery, in which Cargill and other big American traders made millions while prices for consumers escalated. The Coordinator of PECC's Food Outlook is Dr. Robert Thompson of the World Bank. Thompson is also the President of Winrock International, a non-profit development agency. He is convinced that farming is no longer a means to sustain rural communities and that communities must adapt to meet this reality. You can learn all about Winrock and how "close" it is to solving the world's poverty problems on its home page: www.winrock.org. Winrock is based in Arkansas, USA of all places. Perhaps its location in Bill Clinton’s home state may explain its massive US$35 million annual budget? Given Winrock's policies, I was not surprised to learn that its major donors are the USDA, the USAID, the World Bank, and the Asian Development Bank. The principle sponsor of the Food Outlook is Rabobank International of the Netherlands. Much of its investment activity is concentrated in the food sector, especially in the Asia- Pacific region. Rabobank’s "Expert Forecaster", Dr. Anning Wei, contributed "substantially" to PECC's Outlook. Another major sponsor is the Farm Foundation. It claims to be "a nonprofit organization . . . to improve the well-being of US agriculture and rural people". Its Board members include: Richard Gady, VP of Public Affairs and Chief Economist of ConAgra, Inc.; Donald Jacoby, VP Sales of Novartis; and William Kirk, VP and General Manager of DuPont Agriculture Products. All of PECC’s coordinators for the Food Outlook are Americans with close links to the USDA and US TNCs. In fact, they all work with or for the USDA. Only one of the sponsors is based in Asia-- I-Mei Foods, a Taiwanese Company that proudly states: "For 64 years, the I-Mei brand has been recognized as the equivalent of 'premium quality'. This explains why most world-famous fast-food chains in Chinese Taipei, such as McDonald’s, Burger King, and Kentucky Fried Chicken, persist in buying its hamburger buns and dairy products.” The concentration of TNC and USDA interests in PECC is a clear indication that the big guns of agribusiness are heavily involved in APEC. The biotech and agrochemical industry is also there. Monsanto is an active participant in the APEC Agricultural Technology Committee (ATC), especially in its Biotechnology Workshops. So much so, that a reporter from the New Straits Times (Malaysia) reported that the recent ATC workshop in Kuala Lumpur was a Monsanto meeting. And, as the APEC Leaders’ Statement reveals, it does not take much for these TNCs to get their interests directly onto APEC’s agenda. The 1998 ABAC Report to APEC Leaders now makes a lot more sense. It states: "ABAC proposes an APEC Food System as a comprehensive and equitable approach to action in the food sector. The APEC Food System is a vision of a far more robust regional food system, which efficiently links together food producers, processors, and consumers. A regional food system which harnesses the resources of the region to more securely meet consumers' food needs will maximize the contribution of the food sector to the wealth and prosperity of all economies. The APEC Food System calls for cooperative action (in parallel) in the following areas: rural infrastructure development, dissemination of technological advances, and promotion of trade in food products." ABAC's three areas for cooperative action fit tightly with agro-industry strategies. "Rural infrastructure development" actually means publicly subsidized transportation systems that allow long-distance corporate food systems to retain competitive prices. It is not surprising that the PECC Outlook highlights infrastructure development as its major priority area for next year. "Dissemination of technological advances" can be read as protection of intellectual property and opening markets to genetically engineered crops and foods. And, "promotion of trade in food products" means more business for the largest TNCs, which control nearly 80 percent of the global trade. This food system is enough to make you ill. By Devlin Kuyek From gattwd at corso.ch.planet.gen.nz Tue Dec 8 09:07:07 1998 From: gattwd at corso.ch.planet.gen.nz (Gatt Watchdog) Date: Tue, 08 Dec 1998 12:07:07 +1200 Subject: [asia-apec 955] More revelations in Canada SprayPEC saga Message-ID: THE. VANCOUVER SUN THURSDAY, DECEMBER 3, 1998 STUDENT CLAIMS PMO, OFFICER STEWART TALKED An APEC protester claims an RCMP officer consulted with Prime Minister's Office before spraying incident. Kelly Sinoski and Doug Todd A prominent student protester at APEC claims RCMP Staff Sergeant Hugh Stewart consulted with the Prime Minister's Office before the infamous pepper spraying incident in November 1997. Jonathan Oppenheim makes the allegations in his submission to the RCMP Public Complaints Commission, which is investigating the RCMP's handling of protesters at the APEC summit. His submission quotes interviews from an internal RCMP investigation that has not yet been released. However, the interviews were distributed to lawyers for all parties involved in the probe. Oppenheim released material from his submission on his website Wednesday. However, commission counsel Kevin Gillet refused to release the submission officially, saying it was not made while the commission was proceeding and shouldn't be made public. Oppenheim's submission quotes Stewart as saying in an interview that he and senior officers met with PMO officials before deciding to use pepper spray to disperse the crowd. But PMO official Jean Carle was quoted as telling the police investigation he had no involvement in the discussions about dispersing the crowd. According to transcripts of radio communications provided by Oppenheim, RCMP Superintendent Wayne May, who was in charge of over-all security, radioed the command centre, saying: "We got to start moving, just talking to the Prime Minister's Office here and they figure about 4 o'clock and if there's any delay the PM's going to be wanting a full briefing....'' Oppenheim said Wednesday "My concern is the Prime Minister's Office was involved in giving the RCMP orders, to ensure there would be no dissenting protesters." Hearings into how the RCMP handled the APEC summit are on hold until the Federal Court deals with allegations by the Mounties' lawyer that the RCMP Public Complaints Commission chairman is biased. Stewart wouldn't comment on Oppenheim's allegations, but two RCMP lawyers said they were not aware that PMO officials were involved in the decision to use pepper spray at APEC. RCMP lawyer Kevin Woodall said he recalls the officials from the Prime Minister's Office met with police only to find out what was going on. RCMP lawyer George MacIntosh said he prefers to let the hearings reveal what happened. "I'm not going to get into Jon's thesis bit by bit," he said. "We really have to let that evidence play out in the hearing because there are too many witnesses to be accurate." Carle couldn't be reached for comment. From gattwd at corso.ch.planet.gen.nz Wed Dec 9 05:46:14 1998 From: gattwd at corso.ch.planet.gen.nz (Gatt Watchdog) Date: Wed, 09 Dec 1998 08:46:14 +1200 Subject: [asia-apec 956] GATT Watchdog on APEC and 50th Anniversary Message-ID: Media Release for Immediate Use 8 December 1998 New Zealand grandstanding on Universal Declaration of Human Rights 50th anniversary hypocritical New Zealand Government attempts to make political mileage out of the 50th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights are highly hypocritical and unconvincing says fair trade coalition GATT Watchdog. Prime Minister Jenny Shipley and Foreign Affairs Minister Don McKinnon will both speak at events in Wellington related to the anniversary on Thursday afternoon (10 December). "Here we have a government that is one of the most ardent advocates of a global framework of economic policymaking which subordinates people's needs to the narrow economic goals of achieving open trade and investment and higher rates of economic growth. It will shortly take over the chair of APEC, a forum which excludes from consideration the non-economic consequences for poverty, Indigenous Peoples, human rights, employment or the environment unless they are redefined in trade-related terms. The government's grandstanding on human rights can have no credibility given that it endorses such an unsound forum for economic policy-making like APEC which actively delinks the economic programme which it advocates from its effects," says GATT Watchdog spokesperson, Aziz Choudry. "The desire to impose a single market-driven, export-oriented model of development on the Asia Pacific is in itself a gross violation of fundamental human and democratic rights. Especially at a time when the economic crisis continues to devastate millions of people's lives throughout the region. The package of reforms which APEC promotes attacks the right to self-determination and the right of peoples to choose and participate in the kind of development which they want." "Human rights abuses frequently accompany free trade. Foreign and domestic investors seek minimal barriers to the exploitation of people and resources. The rush to become "internationally competitive" almost inevitably dictates the deregulation of labour markets, a lower standard of health and safety requirements, the erosion or elimination of minimum wages and conditions, lack of job security, and cuts to public sector spending in areas like health, education, housing and welfare. We've seen that right here in New Zealand - and it's happening across the region," he said. "In recent years, New Zealand, along with governments of other APEC economies, has participated in intergovernmental conferences including the rights of the child (New York), the environment (Rio), human rights (Vienna), population and development (Cairo), social development (Copenhagen) and women (Beijing). But the consequences of the form of economic and trade liberalisation which APEC promotes violate the fundamental rights to which they agreed." "If the government was really sincere about human rights, a good start would be for it to cancel next year's APEC circus and initiate a full and open discussion on the economic and non-economic costs and benefits of the APEC model. Given that this seems unlikely, we can be sure that APEC 1999 will continue the tradition of human rights violations which have accompanied every APEC Summit by security forces trained to suppress domestic dissent and ensure that overseas delegations are spared political embarrassment." "What kind of commitment to basic human rights is reflected in the government's priorities in putting at least $45 million into hosting APEC 1999 when health and education, welfare and housing continue to be chronically underfunded?" For further comment, contact Aziz Choudry, GATT Watchdog ph (03) 3662803 From tpl at cheerful.com Wed Dec 9 09:02:19 1998 From: tpl at cheerful.com (tpl@cheerful.com) Date: Wed, 09 Dec 1998 08:02:19 +0800 Subject: [asia-apec 957] Chossudovsky on G7 "Solution" to Global Financial Crisis Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.19981209080219.006c7cec@pop.skyinet.net> >From: Michel Chossudovsky > > >THE G7 "SOLUTION" TO THE GLOBAL FINANCIAL CRISIS: > >A MARSHALL PLAN FOR CREDITORS AND SPECULATORS > >by > >Michel Chossudovsky > >Professor of Economics, University of Ottawa, author of "The Globalisation >of Poverty, Impacts of IMF and World Bank Reforms", Third World Network, >Penang and Zed Books, London, 1997. (The book can be ordered from >twn@igc.apc.org) > >Copyright by Michel Chossudovsky, Ottawa 1998. All rights reserved. To >publish or reproduce this text, contact the author at chossudovsky@sprint.ca > > >Following the dramatic nosedive of the Russian ruble, financial markets >around the World had plummeted to abysmally low levels. The Dow Jones >plunged by 554 points on August 31st, its second largest decline in the >history of the New York Stock Exchange. In the uncertain wake of "black >September 1998", G7 ministers of finance had gathered hastily in >Washington. On their political agenda: a multibillion dollar plan to avert >the risks of a Worldwide financial meltdown. In the words of its political >architects US Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin and UK Chancellor of the >Exchequer Gordon Brown: "we must do more to . . . limit the swings of >booms and busts that destroy hope and diminish wealth."1 > >Announced by President Bill Clinton in late October, the G7 proposal to >install a 90 billion-dollar fund "to help protect vulnerable but >essentially healthy nations" from currency and stock market speculation >will go down in history as the biggest financial scam of the post-war era. > >Hidden Agenda > >Skilfully presented to the international community as a timely "solution" >to the global financial crisis, the establishment of a "precautionary fund" >under IMF stewardship proposes to deter "financial turbulence spreading >from country to country in a contagion process." The underlying objective >is "to send a clear message to speculators that they may be taking big >risks if they [short] sell a nation's currency."2 > >Yet in practice, the G7-IMF artifice accomplishes exactly the opposite >results. Rather than "taming the speculator" and averting financial >instability, the existence of billions of dollars stashed away in a >"precautionary fund" (safely established in anticipation of a crisis) is >likely to entice speculators to persist in their deadly raids on national >currencies . . . > >The multibillion dollar fund was not devised (as claimed by its architects) >to help nations under speculative assault; on the contrary, it constitutes >a convenient "safety net" for the "institutional speculator." "The money is >there" to be drawn upon and the speculators know it. If central banks in >Asia or Latin America (in an abortive attempt to prop up their ailing >currencies) were to contemplate defaulting on their (forward) foreign >exchange contracts, the precautionary lines of credit (serving as a >"backup") would enable banks and financial institutions to swiftly collect >their multibillion dollar loot. > >In other words, the money "to bail out the speculators" would be readily >available and accessible well in advance of a currency crisis. Moreover, >the IMF sponsored "rescue operation" would no longer hinge upon clumsy ad >hoc negotiations put together hastily in the cruel aftermath of a currency >devaluation. > >Whereas the IMF would still be called in to impose even harsher economic >measures, the bailout money would be "available up front": no nervous last >minute meeting as on Christmas eve (24 December 1997) when Wall Street >bankers met behind closed doors (under the auspices of the New York Federal >Reserve Bank) to put the finishing touches on the renegotiation of Korea's >short-term debt.3 > >Reducing Risks for Banks and Financial Institutions > >Rather than repelling the speculator, the existence of the precautionary >fund significantly diminishes the risks of conducting speculative >operations. Not surprisingly, the global banks and investment houses (well >versed in the art of financial manipulation through their affiliated hedge >funds) have unequivocally endorsed the G7-IMF policy initiative. Barely >analysed by the global media, the scheme will reinforce the command of >"institutional speculators" over global financial markets as well as their >leverage in imposing ruthless macroeconomic reforms. > >A Marshall Plan for the Speculator > >A colossal amount of money has been allocated (from tax payers' wallets) to >"financing" future speculative assaults: the 90 billion dollar scheme >constitutes a "Marshall Plan for institutional speculators" representing an >amount (in real terms) roughly equal to the entire budget of the Marshall >Plan (86.6 billion dollars at 1995 prices) allocated between 1948 and 1951 >to the post-War reconstruction of Western Europe.4 > >Yet in sharp contrast to the Marshall Plan, the money transferred under >both the Asian bailouts (more than $100 billion) and the proposed G7-IMF >precautionary fund ($90 billion) contribute "to lining the pockets" of the >global banks leading to an unprecedented accumulation of money wealth. None >of this money will be channelled into rehabilitating the shattered >economies of developing countries. Under the new IMF Facility for >contingency financing, international banks and financial institutions will >be able to swiftly collect debts (from developing countries) initially up >to the 90 billion dollars ceiling. > >Of this amount, some 30-40 billion dollars have already been carefully set >aside to ensure that Brazil (following massive capital flight) does not >default to its Wall Street creditors. In return, President Fernando >Henrique Cardoso, faithful to his financial masters, has committed the >Brazilian government to sweeping austerity measures which will drive large >sectors of Brazil's population (including the middle classes) into abysmal >poverty. In this regard, the IMF's economic therapy in Brazil promises to >be more unmerciful than that applied in Asia. In turn, the cost of >servicing the precautionary line of credit will be substantially higher. > >The remaining 50-60 billion dollars is available to be used to "finance" >future speculative raids and bailout agreements (eg. in Latin America, the >Middle East and South Asia) leading to the concurrent dismantling of >national-level monetary policy. This destructive process, however, does not >terminate once the 90 billion dollar ceiling has been reached: once the >money has been used up, the precautionary fund (established as a "standing >arrangement") can if required be replenished (with contributions from G7 >countries). > >A Massive Transfer of Money Wealth > >The transfer of wealth resulting from currency speculation is unprecedented >in modern history. Solely in Asia, more than 100 billion dollars of foreign >exchange reserves have been confiscated since mid-1997. Another 90 billion >dollars are envisaged under the precautionary scheme. And these amounts do >not include the collection of private debts nor the value of assets >appropriated by Western capital under the privatisation programmes >(estimated for Russia alone to be more than five times the Marshall plan). >In return, Russia will receive a meagre 500 million in US Food Aid on >condition it faithfully conforms to the IMF's economic agenda. > >The Demise of Monetary Policy > >Through their decision, G7 leaders have sanctioned the destruction of >monetary policy and the derogation of national economic sovereignty. >Through the manipulation of currency markets, billions of dollars of money >wealth will be transferred from the vaults of central banks into private >financial hands. >Total available foreign exchange reserves in the vaults of the World's >central banks is less than the daily forex turnover of more than 1,200 >billion dollars. A small number of global creditors will control money >creation. > >In turn, this demise of central banks has contributed to dramatically >boosting the levels of global debt while furthering the process of economic >and social collapse. G7 political leaders bear a heavy burden of >responsibility in adopting a scheme which contributes to aggravating the >global economic crisis. Moreover, they have blatantly misled the >international community on the likely consequences of the multibillion >dollar precautionary fund. > >Boosting the Levels of Global Debt > >The speculative assaults not only boost the levels of external debt in >developing countries (eg. Korea, Indonesia, Brazil), they also contribute >to heightening the debt burden in G7 countries: the financing of the >bailouts (under the multibillion precautionary fund) will largely come from >the public purse requiring the issuing by G7 governments of vast amounts of >public debt. Ironically, the latter will be underwritten by the same >investment banks routinely involved in the speculative assaults. > >In other words, the G7 proposal is conducive to a massive increase in the >levels of public debt while at the same time creating conditions which >accelerate the collapse of production and employment. The latter in turn >trigger the accumulation of large amounts of personal (household) debts, >nonperforming loans of small and medium sized enterprises, etc., leading to >bankruptcies and loan forfeiture. > >The "Privatisation" of the IMF Bailouts > >The 90 billion dollar deal was hastily put together by US Treasury >officials following consultations behind closed doors with the >representatives of the World's largest banks and brokerage houses. The >precautionary facility is to provide "short-term" contingency financing at >substantially higher interest rates (300 to 500 base points above the IMF >standard lending rates). > >In other words, financing will be available at 3 percent (or more) above >the current IMF soft lending rate of 4.7 percent. This pattern imposed by >the US Congress in October (in relation to the $18 billion US contribution >to the fund) violates the statutes of the IMF as an intergovernmental body; >it derogates the Bretton Woods agreement of 1944. While it increases the >burden of servicing the debt under the bailout, it also reduces the >repayment period (ie. from the standard three to 10 years to one to 2.5 >years). In other words, the bailout money provided under the fund would >(within a short period of time) have to be rescheduled with private lending >institutions at market rates of interest. > >In other words, the G7-IMF scheme not only artificially inflates the debt >burden (by hiking up interest rates), it also establishes conditions which >favour the eventual "privatisation" of the bailouts. In this context, >"policy conditionalities" would be negotiated by the global banks (rather >than by the IMF): "[M]echanisms could be designed ahead of time to ensure >the timely involvement of the private [banking] sector in providing >liquidity support to countries in times of financial stress."5 > >Overhauling the IMF > >The banks have hinted that what they really want is a de facto private >sector bureaucracy (which they can more effectively control) rather than a >cumbersome intergovernmental body. This overhaul of the IMF is to be >carefully supervised by the US Treasury acting on behalf of Wall Street. In >other words, the IMF has also been brought more directly under the >political trusteeship of the US Administration in blatant violation of its >intergovernmental status. Overshadowing the IMF (and limiting its authority >to conduct future negotiations with member governments), the Congressional >appropriation bill had identified precise loan "conditionalities" to be >inserted in future IMF bailouts (including provisions which facilitate the >dumping of US grain surpluses as well as the "enactment of bankruptcy laws >that treat foreigners fairly"). > >Speculators call the Shots on Crisis Management > >After the meltdown of Wall Street on Black Monday 31st of August 1998, G7 >leaders had pointed nervously to the need for "taming financial markets." >Proposals to control the unfettered movement of money had been put forth. >British Prime Minister Tony Blair highlighting the shortcomings of the IMF, >had called for an overhaul of the Bretton Woods institutions: "the existing >system has not served us terribly well . . . "6 > >Mea culpa by renowned speculator George Soros: "financial markets are >inherently unstable, which can cause tremendous damage to society."7 >Frictions between the Bretton Woods sister organisations had also surfaced >at their annual meetings in October 1998. In an admonishing statement, the >Senior Vice President of the World Bank Joseph Stiglitz publically >expressed his disapproval of the Washington consensus. > >In the meantime, despite renewed stock market instability in developing >countries, the storm had temporarily settled on Wall Street much to the >relief of New York's major brokerage houses. Caving in to the demands of >the global banks, the issue of capital controls had been casually dropped >from the political agenda: "the new buzz-words are `sequencing', `orderly >capital account liberalisation', `regulations, yes, restrictions, no'."8 > >A new invigorated "Washington consensus" was in the making. The unfettered >movement of capital was presented as the sole means to achieving global >prosperity. According to UBS-SBC George Blum and Citigroup's William Rhodes >speaking on behalf of some 300 global banks and brokerage houses: "capital >controls will seriously damage medium-term prospects for raising standards >of living".9 > >Neoliberal economic policy was alive, speculators rather than elected >politicians were calling the shots. G7 leaders together with the Bretton >Woods institutions had formally invited the global banks "to be involved >appropriately in crisis management and resolution".10 In an absurd logic, >those who foster financial turbulence are called in to identify policies >which attenuate financial turbulence . . . > >In turn, the broader structural causes of the economic crisis remain >unheralded. Blinded by neoliberal dogma, policy makers are unable to >distinguish between "solutions" and "causes." Public opinion is misled. >Lost in the barrage of self-serving media reports on the deadly >consequences of "economic contagion", the precise "market mechanisms" >which trigger financial instability are barely mentioned. > >Despite mounting criticism directed against the Bretton Woods institutions, >the G7 decision not only upholds but strengthens the IMF's lethal economic >medicine as the unequivocal "solution" when in fact it is the "cause" of >economic collapse and financial turmoil. > >With the exception of token rhetorical statements on the destabilising >impacts of currency and stock market speculation, no concrete revisions of >the macroeconomic agenda have been put forth. The G7-IMF precautionary fund >"entrenches" the rights of speculators"; it provides an unconditional >"green light" to financial institutions to "short sell" national currencies >all over the world. > >Dismantling the State: Towards the Development of a Private Sector >Bureaucracy > >The global banks decide on what constitutes a "politically correct" >economic agenda. The new "financial architecture" is to be based on the >removal of all remaining barriers to capital movements. > >According to Alan Greenspan, chairman of the US Federal Reserve Board, >financial markets are too complex for public regulators to oversee: >"Twenty-first century regulation is going to increasingly have to rely on >private counterparty surveillance to achieve safety and soundness [of >financial markets] . . . "11 > >More generally, the tendency is toward a system of "private regulation" >(under the direct control of banks and MNCs) in which governments and >intergovernmental bodies would play a subsidiary role. In other words, the >stranglehold of creditors over the State apparatus in all major regions of >the world (including North America and Western Europe) is conducive to the >development of a private sector bureaucracy which oversees activities >previously under State jurisdiction. > >This dismantling of the State, however, is not limited to the privatisation >of social programmes and public utilities, corporate capital also aspires >to eventually acquire control over all State- supported "civil society >activities." Cultural activities, the performing arts, sports, community >services, etc., would be transformed into profit making ventures. In this >regard, the proposed Multilateral Agreement on Investment (MAI) purports to >deregulate foreign investment, dismantle State institutions and transform >all State supported "civil society activities" (eg. at municipal level) >into money making operations. > >"Taming the Tigers" > >In parallel with the forced removal of impediments on the movement of >capital through the disruption of currency markets, the political power >brokers of the "free market" will continue their relentless drive to >entrench the rights of banks and corporations in several legally binding >agreements including the Multilateral Agreement on Investment (now under >WTO auspices) and the equally controversial amendment of the IMF articles >on capital account liberalisation. > >Combined with overt political pressures by Washington, the G7-IMF >multibillion dollar fund will also be used to finance future speculative >assaults on countries such as China (including Hong Kong), Malaysia, >Taiwan, Chile and more recently Russia (under Prime Minister Primakov) >which have defied the "free market" by adopting foreign exchange >restrictions and/or controls on speculative transactions. The Taiwan >authorities, for instance, took measures "to prevent illegal trading of >funds managed by George Soros which have been blamed for causing the local >stock market to fall."12 Hong Kong has introduced measures which curb >short-selling of stocks and currency speculation.13 > >The G7 scheme (coupled with the decision not to hamper the movement of >money) is intent on weakening these initiatives and destabilising >local-level capitalism; the ultimate objective is to deregulate currency >markets, break down remaining impediments to the movement of capital and >dismantle State control over monetary policy. > >Speculators and Creditors get Cold Feet > >By legitimising mechanisms which boost global debt and destabilise national >economies, G7 policy makers have also "sown the seeds of destruction." The >creation of unsurmountable debts is backfiring on the World's most powerful >financial actors. The resulting dislocations in production, the "drying up" >of consumer markets (following the simultaneous collapse in the standard of >living in a large number of countries) has resulted in a proliferation of >nonperforming loans. > >The inexorable accumulation of global wealth has backlashed on the real >economy leading to the disengagement of human and material resources. >Physical assets stand idle or are withdrawn from the market process >resulting in plant closures, layoffs and corporate bankruptcies. Poverty >and unemployment are the result of massive overproduction (marked by >overcapacity) in virtually all sectors of activity. > >The speculators are caught in the twirl: in a cruel irony, financial >turmoil is backfiring on the financial institutions which provoked market >instability in the first place. Bank losses are not limited to Korea, Japan >or China; some of the West's largest financial institutions (involved in >shaky investment deals, high risk trade in hedge funds, "heavy exposure" to >emerging market debt, etc.) are now getting "a bitter taste of their own >economic medicine." > >Heavy bank losses have also triggered the layoff of thousands of employees >on Wall Street. At J. P Morgan, Merrill Lynch and Credit Suisse- First >Boston, etc., previously affluent and successful brokers have been >ruthlessly driven onto the streets. > >The Destabilising Impacts of the Hedge Funds > >Some of the World's largest banks and brokerage houses on both sides of the >Atlantic have incurred heavy losses: Citigroup, Bank America, the Dresdner >and Deutsche banks (hit by massive default on Russian debt), UBS-SBC, >Credit Lyonnais, Merrill Lynch, ING Baring, Credit Suisse- First Boston, to >name but a few. Most of these banks can be considered as "institutional >speculators" with formal links to their numerous affiliated hedge funds. >UBS is under investigation in Switzerland for its shady deals with the LTCM >hedge fund; Bank America, the largest US bank, has declared a 1.4 billion >credit loss following the demise of its Wall Street hedge fund D. E. Shaw.14 > >Rather than curbing speculative trade, the G7-IMF precautionary fund >provides a "green light" to the hedge funds routinely involved in >speculative operations. A large share of these hedge funds operate from >offshore banking havens to escape government regulation and taxes. > >The political consensus among G7 ministers of finance is that it would be >unwise to regulate the hedge funds. Echoing Wall Street and the US Federal >Reserve Board, the Bank of England has urged hedge funds "to regulate >themselves" underscoring the fact that "tighter regulation of hedge funds >could prove self-defeating." > >The dramatic rescue by a consortium of Wall Street firms of the LTCM hedge >fund in September 1998 (crippled with debts of more than three billion >dollars) is but the tip of the iceberg in a global cobweb of over four >thousand hedge funds. LTCM was run by a former Salomon Brothers executive, >John Meriwether. > >Described as "pool partnerships of wealthy investors", the hedge funds were >created and bred by the financial establishment, serving the interests of >the banks, corporations and rich individuals. They have become an integral >part of the structures of investment banking with "reported capital" of >some 300 billion dollars. However, through "highly leveraged operations", >this capital of 300 billion has been multiplied to reach astronomical >figures: LTCM's fund manager John Meriwether, for instance, had invested >500 million for every million in capital with operations totalling an >estimated "exposure" of 200 billion dollars. The latter amount is the >"exposure" (through shady investments in emerging markets) of a single >hedge fund out of a total of four thousand hedge funds! Needless to say, a >large share of hedge fund business transacted in the offshore banking >havens goes unreported. > >The hedge funds have contacts in high places; they also wield considerable >influence in determining the direction of G7 reforms. They have the ability >of moving billions of dollars around the world overnight overshadowing the >powers of governments. Their operations are predicated on the manipulation >of market forces: the hedge funds capture large amounts of wealth from the >real economy ultimately leading to the accumulation of enormous debts and >the demise of productive activity. > >Combined with the plight of the peripheral bond markets, a failure of the >hedge funds would backlash on the entire structure of Western banking >including its more than 55 offshore facilities (eg. Cayman Islands, >Bermuda, Luxemburg, etc.). In turn, stock market instability threatens the >future of mutual funds and pension funds (many of which also include >speculative investments in their portfolio). > >The Merger Frenzy > >The G7's "new financial architecture" favours an atmosphere of cutthroat >competition leading to a new wave of mega-mergers and acquisitions. In >turn, the merger frenzy has contributed to artificially boosting the New >York Stock Exchange to new record heights. The multibillion spoils of >currency and stock market speculation are channelled toward the acquisition >of real assets: the enormous cash reserves accruing to institutional >speculators are also recycled toward the financing of corporate mergers >including the purchase of state assets under the numerous privatisation >programmes. > >In turn, currency speculation in emerging markets has favoured the >dislocation of national capitalism in Asia and Latin America and the demise >and subordination of the local economic elites leading to an unprecedented >concentration of global economic and financial power. In the wake of the >IMF sponsored bailouts, global corporations --out on a lucrative shopping >spree in Asia-- have acquired control over numerous "troubled" national >enterprises and financial institutions. > >Global Alliances > >The formation of new "global alliances" between European and American >capital has rapidly changed the balance of power in the World market. With >the merger boom, British and German banking interests have (inter alia) >joined hands with Wall Street leading to the formation of powerful >financial giants. > >Banker's Trust-Deutsche Bank, BP-Amoco, Daimler-Chrysler, to name but a >few: the mega-mergers are proceeding at a very rapid pace in banking, >mining, oil and gas, etc., as well as in the "high tech" industries >(computers, telecommunications, electronics, bio- genetics). The >mega-mergers are also contributing to redefining the geopolitical landscape >of the post-Cold war era. Whereas the former Soviet Union has been defeated >as a superpower, the onslaught of the Asian currency crisis has >significantly undermined the economic dominion of Japan in the Asia-Pacific >region. > >In turn, the Euro-American banking conglomerates are shareholders in the >World's largest industrial corporations (eg. Deutsche Bank has a sizeable >stake in Daimler-Chrysler), they also oversee the restructuring of national >economies (under the bailout agreements) in Eastern Europe, the Balkans, >Latin America and South East Asia. These "Atlantic corporate alliances" in >banking and industry seek to edge out weaker competitors including their >Japanese rivals. Moreover, financial deregulation has also opened up the >Japanese economy to corporate buyouts by Western investment banks. >Supported by the G7-IMF economic agenda, the expansion of Euro-American >capital into new frontiers is contributing to undermining Japan's position >as an economic power. > >Economic Falsehoods > >A "false consciousness" has invaded all spheres of critical debate and >discussion which masks the workings of the global economic system; at the >same token, it also prevents the international community from acknowledging >its devastating impacts on people all over the World. What are the causes >of the crisis as well as the powerful financial interests which are >responsible for financial turbulence and economic dislocation? > >Public opinion has been skilfully misled: the Western economy is said to be >"healthy"; "economic infection" is "spreading" from Asia and Russia >(designated as "sick economies"); politicians, mainstream economists and >the Western media have contributed to trivialising and distorting the >causes of the global economic crisis, not to mention the formulation of >stylised "solutions": "we must stave off the growing flu because flu proves >to be contagious." > >Freezing Speculative Transactions > >The most urgent task consists in subjecting financial markets to public >scrutiny and social control. A Tobin tax will not suffice in reversing the >tide of destruction: "financial disarmament" requires freezing (nationally >and internationally) the entire gamut of speculative instruments, >dismantling the hedge funds, reintroducing controls on the international >movement of money and progressively breaking down the structures of >offshore banking which provide a safe haven to "dirty money" and the flight >of undeclared corporate profits. While these "preventive measures" do not >constitute a (long-term) "solution" to the global economic crisis, they >would nonetheless contribute to significantly slowing down the accumulation >of money wealth and attenuating the devastating impacts of currency and >stock market speculation on millions of people. In the words of Malaysia's >Prime Minister Mohamad Mahathir: "unless [speculative] currency trading is >recognised as the root cause of the present problem, corrective actions >cannot be made . . . Cosmetic adjustments will not do any good at all."15 > >Dismantling the Washington Consensus > >Beyond the adoption of short-term "preventive" measures geared toward >freezing speculative trade, far-reaching changes in the structures of the >global economic system are required, which reverse the concentration of >financial power and restore the democratic control of society over the >levers of economic policy. As a first step, the "Washington consensus" must >be broken, the IMF's lethal economic medicine must be discarded; in turn >the mechanics of macroeconomic reform must be reversed requiring the >establishment of "an expansionary economic agenda" geared toward restoring >wages and alleviating global poverty. > >Of crucial importance is the concurrent "democratisation of central banks." >Under the present setup, creditors and speculators control money creation >including the financing of State economic and social programmes, the >payment of wages, etc. In other words, what is at stake is not only the >cancellation of enormous public debts held by private financial >institutions but also the "re-appropriation" by society of monetary policy, >--ie. the democratic control by society of money creation and the process >of financing economic and social development. > >In turn, the process of dismantling the Washington consensus will also >require (in close coordination with the process of "financial disarmament") >the continued struggle against a number of legally binding international >agreements (eg. under WTO and IMF auspices) which establish an "enabling >environment" for MNCs and global banks. > Notes > >1. Quoted in Financial Times, London, 31 October-1 November 1998. See also >G7 Communique, October 30, 1998. > >2. David Sanger, Wealthy Nations back Plan to Speed Help to the Weak', New >York Times, 31 October 1998. > >3. See Financial Times, London, 27-28 December 1997, p. 3. > >4. See US Bureau of Labour Statistics, Purchasing Power of the Dollar, >1950-1995. The Marshall Plan transferred 13 billion dollars of US aid from >1948 to 1951, equivalent to 86.6 billion dollars at 1995 prices. See also >Barry Eichengreen and J. Bradford de Long, The Marshall Plan: History's >most Successful Structural Adjustment Programme, CEPR discussion paper, May >1992. >5. IMF, Strengthening the Architecture of the International Monetary >System, Washington, October 1998, p. 5. > >6. Financial Times, 21 September 1998, p. 1. > >7. Reuters (press dispatch), 10 November 1998. > >8. See Robert Wade, Behind the Big Push for Free Movement of Capital, Third >World Resurgence, No. 98, October 1998. > >9. Institute of International Finance, Press Release, Tokyo, 13 September >1998. > >10. G7 Communique, October 30, 1998. > >11. Quoted in "Greenspan urges Repair of Global Architecture", American >Banker, October 1998. > >12. Martin Khor. "Tide turning on Financial Free Market", Third World >Resurgence, no. 98, 1996, p. 32. > >13. Ibid. > >14. Financial Times, London, 15 October 1998, p. 1. > >15 Mohamad Mahatir, quoted in the Strait Times, 3 November 1998. > > > Michel Chossudovsky > > Department of Economics, > University of Ottawa, > Ottawa, K1N6N5 > > Voice box: 1-613-562-5800, ext. 1415 > Fax: 1-514-425-6224 > E-Mail: chossudovsky@sprint.ca > >http://www.voicenet.co.jp/~friede/ines/special/fwar_frm.htm >http://www.interlog.com/~cjazz/chossd.htm >http://www.heise.de/tp/english/special/eco/ >http://heise.xlink.de/tp/english/special/eco/6099/1.html#anchor1 > From jaggi at tao.ca Thu Dec 10 13:16:16 1998 From: jaggi at tao.ca (Jaggi Singh) Date: Wed, 9 Dec 1998 23:16:16 -0500 (EST) Subject: [asia-apec 958] Vancouver Riot Police Bloody Protesters Message-ID: [The following article is based on telephone interviews with protesters, organizers, and eyewitnesses at yesterday's "Welcome Chretien" demonstration in Vancouver. First-hand accounts were provided by Julie, Aiyanas, Martha, William, John, Marion, Jon, Zoe, Darryl, Nora, Jamie and Matt. Further information was used from corporate media reports on the web -- the Vancouver Sun, Vancouver Province and the Globe and Mail -- as well as CBC Radio.] RIOT POLICE BLOODY PROTESTERS AT ANTI-CHRETIEN DEMO IN VANCOUVER MORE THAN ONE YEAR AFTER APEC, PRIME MINISTER RETURNS TO VANCOUVER 9 ARRESTS MADE FOR "UNLAWFUL ASSEMBLY", OTHERS INJURED AND HOSPITALIZED by Jaggi Singh for A-Infos and the Direct Action Media Network and [posted Wednesday, December 9th, 1998] Close to 2000 demonstrators (700, according to the Vancouver police) gathered at the Hyatt Hotel in rainy downtown Vancouver yesterday evening to protest outside a $400/plate fundraiser for the governing Liberal Party of Canada. The focus of the demonstration was Prime Minister Jean Chretien, who was making his first public visit to Vancouver since the infamous Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) Leader's Summit last November 1997. The "Welcome Chretien" demonstration was organized and supported by wide cross-section of Vancouver groups and individuals: unions, socialist parties, student organizations, anti-poverty groups, youth organizations, alternative media outlets and other coalitions and collectives. The protest was spearheaded by "Democracy Street" which represents 27 protesters who are pursuing a lawsuit against the government and police for their conduct at last year's APEC Summit. The large and animated mobilization yesterday evening was marred, however, when riot police were deployed from inside the Hyatt. Armed with shields, batons, rubber bullet guns and police dogs, they attempted to disperse demonstrators from Burrard Street in front of the posh hotel. The police made a concerted effort not to use pepper spray and repeat the images of last November. Ironically, weeks ago Prime Minister Chretien defended the use of pepper spray as "more civilized" than baseball bats. Yesterday, batons were the chosen weapon of Vancouver's "civilized" police. Many demonstrators were injured and bloodied as the riot police -- officially termed the "Crowd Control Unit" -- began beating their shields in unison and attacked the crowd of protesters. According to Marion, who attended the protest as a legal observer, "Riot police swarmed out, switched places with the VPD [Vancouver Police Department], and just started beating people." In the words of William, who helped organize the protest and was filming the demo, "[The riot police] were pushing [protesters] back with shields and then started swinging clubs. People were getting absolutely clocked." According to Martha, who had her camera broken by the police, "[The riot police] just came forward and started swinging. I tried to step back, but there was no where to go." In her words, "People cleared out after people were injured." Darryl, who received four blows to the shoulder, described the actions of the police as "disgusting" since they were striking at demonstrators were attempting to back up. Many demonstrators were badly injured. According to media reports, at least 4 people were hospitalized, but everyone was soon released and no injuries deemed life threatening. At the scene, the demonstration's medical team, which set up across the street at a bus shelter, was treating dozens of people for injuries as a result of baton blows. William observed at least two or three people who were unconscious. In his words, there were "three or four people with serious scalp wounds" and "six people [were] laying on the ground with gaping head wounds." Other demonstrators received bruises and cuts. One protester received a black eye from an officer, and was also grabbed by his nostrils. The brutality and provocations incensed demonstrators, who remained outside the hotel for up to 45 minutes while surrounded by riot police. Ironically, a second unit of riot police that made an appearance was led by Staff-Sergeant Hugh Stewart of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP), infamous for his liberal use of pepper spray at APEC (He was quickly dubbed Sergeant Pepper). The demonstrators eventually left the front of the Hyatt and moved to the police station at Main Street and Cordova where 9 arrested protesters were being detained. From there, a smaller crowd moved to the Main Skytrain station, where over a hundred entered without paying and proceeded to occupy the station for some time. Police intimidation and brutality started well before the arrival of the riot police. During the demo, protesters who were blockading entrances had their hair pulled, necks twisted and had bikes shoved against them by police. According to one account, one person's nose was yanked by a VPD officer. Another person had his banner grabbed away (for the record, it read: "Human need, not corporate greed"). Apparently, these actions served no other purpose than to try to provoke demonstrators. Before the arrival of the riot squad, the atmosphere of the protest was, by most accounts, festive and militant. The demonstration had managed to block off most entrances to the posh hotel. Members of Food Not Bombs, APEC ALERT and other individuals also engaged in civil disobedience, willing to risk arrest to ensure an effective blockade. Chants of "No suits, no suits" could be heard at one site on Melville Street. The sound truck for the demo, however, was not permitted to get near the hotel. Food Not Bombs had a street serving, and Las Cacaphonistas, a street protest band, played throughout. A giant Chretien puppet weaved in the crowd, occasionally being peppered with mock spray. Two protesters, Nora and Jamie, were offering up impromptu fashion commentaries through megaphones. Observing the well-heeled attendees of the fundraiser, Jamie yelled, "Take a good look at them, and take a good look at us, and let's play "Guess my income!"" According to a VPD police spokesperson, the pretext for the use of riot police, who could be observed through windows on the second floor of the hotel prior to deployment, was a supposed "breach" of police barricades. This "breach incident" occurred when some demonstrators attempted to enter the hotel at the main entrance. Nine of them were eventually arrested. One of the people who tried to enter the Hyatt was punched by a police officer, bloodied, and received stitches on her face. Along with many others, she is considering laying charges for assault. It was after the arrests were made that the riot police were deployed, for no ostensible purpose but to scare and intimidate demonstrators outside the hotel. While the arrests were happening, the Vancouver Sun reports that the 1300 guests inside the hotel were singing "O Canada", the national anthem of the Canadian state. The crowd inside was described by the Vancouver Province as "impeccably coiffed." Some guests were quite upset at the blockade and demo. The Province quotes one Vancouver businessman: "I certainly respect their right to protest, but I think they should respect my right to get in to hear the prime minister speak." He neglected to mention the $400 price tag for his "right", not to mention the riot police defending it outside. Pre-publicity for yesterday's demo included posters with Chretien's face reading, "Wanted: for Crimes Against Democracy." The demonstration focused its opposition to the economic policies of the Liberal government, specifically the embracing of corporate-style globalization of which APEC is just one manifestation. Many of the demonstrators were overtly anti-capitalist, rejecting all the mainstream parties that dominate political discourse in middle-class Canada. The demo also focused on APEC. Chretien has come under fire recently in the mainstream media and elsewhere as a result of documents implicating him in the repression of dissent at the University of British Columbia (UBC) during APEC. It is alleged that the heavy-handed police response at UBC -- including indiscriminate pepper-spraying, nabbing of activists, removal of signs and banners, and more -- was all undertaken to appease former dictator General Suharto of Indonesia who was threatening not to attend the conference for fear of embarrassment. In all, 9 arrests have been confirmed from yesterday's demo: Ian, Tina, Ivan, Mike, Cyrus, Jodi, Sid, Aiyanas and Anton. They are a mix of anti-poverty activists, Food Not Bombs members, APEC ALERT-ers, environmentalists and students from UBC and SFU. They were all charged with "unlawful assembly" and released in the early morning without conditions. A judge elsewhere has already ruled the unlawful assembly provision of the Criminal Code "constitutionally unoperational". This is a result of a challenge by members of Montreal's Commando Bouffe, who expropriated food from the posh Queen Elizabeth Hotel last December 3rd, 1997. The case is now before the Quebec Supreme Court. Yesterday's arrested protesters have yet to receive a court date for a charge that may not even legally exist. [The above article will be updated as more information becomes available.] From rverzola at phil.gn.apc.org Wed Dec 9 08:28:17 1998 From: rverzola at phil.gn.apc.org (Roberto Verzola) Date: Wed, 09 Dec 1998 08:28:17 Subject: [asia-apec 959] anti-Monsanto picket Message-ID: <199812100110.JAA00878@phil.gn.apc.org> Smart farmers burn Monsanto's e-cotton by Roberto Verzola Philippine Journal December 8, 1999 "Indian farmers are smart chaps," said Dr. Sivramiah Shantharam when he talked before the DOST last November 25 on the controversial topic of genetic engineering. Shantharam related that in his younger days, he worked in India for a firm selling agricultural chemicals, and that he learned from experience to appreciate the wisdom of Indian farmers. "Indian farmers know exactly what they need. You may fool them once, but if you do it again, they will chase you out of the village," said Shantharam, who is today a branch chief of the U.S. Department of Agriculture. On the same week as Shantharam's DOST talk, the farmers of Karnataka, India were showing exactly how smart they were. Minister was unaware On November 16: The Indian public was informed by local newspapers that Monsanto "has been conducting 40 field trials with genetically manipulated cotton across five Indian states for the last three months." Monsanto was testing an engineered mutant corn that automatically produced its own insect-killing poison (the Bt toxin). Monsanto had earlier bought into a local company to carry out the mutant e-cotton field trials. Karnataka Agriculture Minister C. Byre Gowda admitted that he had been informed of the on-going trials but was unaware of where they were being undertaken. On November 20: Indian newspapers reported that the Karnataka State Farmers Association (KRRS) had issued a deadline to the State Government and Monsanto to disclose the places where the trials were being conducted and the exact description of the e-cotton seeds that were being tested. '"Monsanto should reveal immediately where the trials are being conducted" failing which "direct action would follow on the company's office in Malleswaram," their president Prof. Nanjundaswamy said. "Monsanto will have to leave the country within a week. Otherwise we will be forced to throw them out," Prof. Nanjundaswamy angrily said. On November 24: The Minister of Agriculture of Karnataka held a press conference, where he was forced by journalists to reveal the three sites where field trials with Monsanto's e-cotton were being conducted. Civil disobedience On November 26, Prof. Nanjundaswamy circulated the following letter: "Monsanto's field trials in Karnataka will be reduced to ashes, starting on Saturday. ...KRRS activists have already contacted the owners of these fields, to explain them which action will be taken, and for what reasons, and to let them know that the KRRS will cover any losses they will suffer. On Saturday the 28th of November, at midday, thousands of farmers will occupy and burn down the three fields in front of the cameras, in an open, announced action of civil disobedience." On November 28, the Karnataka farmers released a statement: " Today the farmers of Karnataka will reduce to ashes one of the illegal field trials that the criminal organisation Monsanto is carrying out in the country. This action will mark the beginning of a campaign of civil disobedience called Operation 'Cremation Monsanto', which will soon be continued in Karnataka and other Indian states. "The field that will be burned today belongs to Basanna, who came to know what kind of plants were growing in his field only last Wednesday, when Byre Gowda (Minister of Agriculture of Karnataka) mentioned his name as he disclosed the three sites where Monsanto's trials are being conducted in Karnataka. Experiment without farmer's knowledge "According to Basanna's testimony, officials of Mahyco Monsanto went to his farm in July and proposed him to grow, free of cost, a new variety of cotton seeds, which they claimed would give very good results. He could not suspect that their intention was to carry out an experiment on genetic engineering without his knowledge and consent, risking the future viability not only of his farm, but of his complete community. "The officials of Mahyco Monsanto, who have signed a written declaration admitting their illegal behaviour, went regularly to apply manure and pesticides to the Bt cotton, including heavy doses of insecticides. However, the plants are infested with bollworm (the pest that Bt cotton is supposed to control) and other pests like white fly and red-rot. Despite the heavy use of chemical fertiliser, traces of which still can be observed in the field, the Bt plants grew miserably, less than half the size of the traditional cotton plants in the adjecent fields. "No single biosafety measure (e.g. buffer zone around the genetically engineered cotton to reduce biopollution, construction of a fence around the field, etc) was undertaken by the Mahyco Monsanto. They did not even demarcate the field as biohazard area." Uprooted, then burned Later in the afternoon of November 28, they released another statement: "The direct action campaign of Indian farmers Operation 'Cremate Monsanto' started today at 13:30 in the village of Maladagudda, about 400 North of Bangalore. Mr. Basanna, owner of the field where an illegal genetic experiment was being conducted without his knowledge, and Prof. Nanjundaswamy, president of KRRS (a Gandhian movement of 10 million farmers in the Southern Indian state of Karnataka), uprooted together the first plant of genetically modified cotton, inviting the rest of the local peasants to do the same. Within a few minutes, all the plants in the field were piled up and ready to be set on fire." Taking their fight to the global arena, the Karnataka farmers also announced: "...we are making an international call for direct action against Monsanto and the rest of the biotech gang. This call for action will hopefully inspire all the people who are already doing a brilliant work against biotech, and many others who so far have not been very active on the issue, to join hands in a quick, effective worldwide effort." The farmers emphasized, "we are calling ONLY for non-violent direct actions". Philippine picket against Monsanto On December 8, Tuesday, Filipino groups opposed to genetically-engineered crops will be holding their own protest in front of Monsanto's Makati office. They are protesting Monsanto's intention to field-test a variety of mutant e-corn in Bai, Laguna and in General Santos in Mindanao. They will be raising four demands: * ban the field-testing of genetically-altered crops * ban the importation of genetically-altered food and food ingredients * kick out biotech seed firms for trying to control our food supplies * stop the patenting of biological materials and processes. The picketeers include the Citizens' Alliance for Consumer Protection, the environmental group Haribon Foundation, Pesticide Action Network, Greenpeace, the Philippine Greens, SEARICE, and a number of religious organizations. If it is serious about its food security program, the government should heed their demands. (Roberto Verzola is the secretary-general of the Philippine Greens.) From gattwd at corso.ch.planet.gen.nz Fri Dec 11 10:52:30 1998 From: gattwd at corso.ch.planet.gen.nz (Gatt Watchdog) Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1998 13:52:30 +1200 Subject: [asia-apec 960] Will there be respect for civil liberties? Message-ID: <8PTB1e2w165w@corso.ch.planet.gen.nz> Diary, New Zealand Herald, Auckland, December 11 1998 (p.2) Will there be respect for civil liberties? by Ted Reynolds Already the obituarists have written off Apec '99, Auckland $44 million debut on the international stage. And the jamboree has not even begun. Fourteen months ago Vancouver played host to the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation forum, and still the people of Vancouver are counting what it cost in civil liberties. Eighteen heads of Government had 2300 Royal Canadian Mounted Police and 700 Vancouver city police looking after them. It was believed to be the biggest security operation ever mounted in North America. >From the start the organisation began to unravel. All through the summer of 1997 Canadian people worked themselves up over President Suharto of Indonesia. >From the Maritime provinces in the Pacific coast, cities sprouted anti-Suharto slogans - so many that Indonesian Foreign Minister Ali Alatas called on Canadian Foreign Minister Lloyd Axworthy to ask, "What gives?" Would protests be so violent that Mr Suharto's dignity would be offended? If so, Suharto would rather not visit Canada. Mr Axworthy could have studies his fingernails for a time and replied that in a democracy protest groups have the right to protest peaceably. As for Mr Suharto, well, he would have to make up his own mind. Instead, Mr Axworthy apologised for the anti-Suharto posters, saying they were "outrageous and excessive, and not the way Canadians behaved." The words signalled Canada's surrender. It was, though, a signal not noticed in Vancouver, on the campus of the University of British Columbia, where the Canadian Government had leased university buildings for Apec and was moving in with pepper spray. The first arrests came four days before the first Apec delegates were due to arrive. Videotapes obtained by the Mounties' complaints commission show a blue-wigged student being pepper-sprayed in the face. From then on, pepper spray became the chief weapon of the police. By the end of the Apec meeting hundreds had been pepper-sprayed and 78 arrested on charges that the police let drop. Well, that was Vancouver. Auckland will be different - there will be no Mr Suharto in Auckland. But there will be people who want to show their disapproval of China's quite appalling record on human rights. And by next year the rulers of Malaysia may have turned their country into a pariah state. Mahathir Mohamad is moving from comic to dictator, and every morning when he wakes he knows to expect the newspapers to lead their front pages with his days doings. Idolatry of that sort can turn a chap's mind. It can lead him into believing he has the right to demand that protest groups be controlled and that his dignity be unsullied. During the 1970s and 1980s our police learned that even university students - even people who show no reverence for the game of rugby - have rights. It was a slow and bumpy process. But in the end there seemed to be reluctant respect for people's right to protest and for the right of police to see that protesters keep within the law. It will be a terrible shame if, in the years of peace since Vietnam and the Springbok tour, the lessons have been forgotted and the police believe that only a finger on a pepper spray stands between Auckland and anarchy. Letters to the editor - letters@herald.co.nz From gattwd at corso.ch.planet.gen.nz Fri Dec 11 12:00:15 1998 From: gattwd at corso.ch.planet.gen.nz (Gatt Watchdog) Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1998 15:00:15 +1200 Subject: [asia-apec 961] Articles on SIS Message-ID: <5uwB1e2w165w@corso.ch.planet.gen.nz> Expert Convinced SIS Law will Change (The Dominion, Friday December 11, 1998) By Cathie Bell THERE was "no doubt" that the law would be changed to allow the Security Intelligence Service to break into people's houses, academic Jim Rolfe said yesterday. Prime Minister Jenny Shipley has indicated the law would be changed after the Appeal Court ruled that an SIS interception warrant did not allow agents to enter private property. Activist Aziz Choudry had appealed the SIS's refusal to let him see documents about SIS agents breaking into his Christchurch home two years ago. Proposals for law changes are expected to be discussed at a meeting of the intelligence agency's oversight committee some time this week. Neither Mrs Shipley nor Labour leader Helen Clark, who is also on the oversight committee, would comment about the proposed law change yesterday. Mr Rolfe, who is writing a book about the SIS the Government Communications Security Bureau, said he thought a law change to enable SIS agents to enter private property was "inevitable". "There's no doubt in my mind that they will either appeal to the Privy Council or change the law. Changing the law would be easier I suspect." He said Australia, Canada, and Britain, in their laws governing intelligence agencies, had provisions to enable spies to enter private property and those could be easily "lifted" for New Zealand. There had to be more than just Mr Choudry's opposition to the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation forum for the SIS to be investigating him, Mr Rolfe said. The SIS usually investigated violence or spying of some kind, he said, though he speculated it could be linked to New Zealand's economic interests, another consideration for SIS investigations. Alliance MP Matt Robson said the Alliance had opposed the extended definition of security - to include economic interests - when it was introduced three years ago. "The Alliance presented a detailed submission, when the legislation was being considered, in which we highlighted our concern at how the SIS could misuse this extended definition." Mr Robson said that then-prime minister Jim Bolger had said in July 196, when opposing an Alliance attempt to make the intelligence and security oversight committee a select committee of Parliament, that "two of the important areas the SIS work in now include looking for terrorists and money-laundering." Mr Robson said Mr Choudry was not a terrorist, nor was he involved in money-laundering. He said Mr Choudry was known for his opposition to free trade and New Zealand's membership of APEC which was "absolutely" legal. "Does opposition to free trade pose a threat to New Zealand's economic well-being?" "When opposing the extended definition of security, we said it could be used by the SIS to spy on those in the community opposed to the current government's economic policies. We have been proved right." Letters to editor: letters@dominion.co.nz From gattwd at corso.ch.planet.gen.nz Fri Dec 11 12:19:04 1998 From: gattwd at corso.ch.planet.gen.nz (Gatt Watchdog) Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1998 15:19:04 +1200 Subject: [asia-apec 962] More on the SIS and APEC Message-ID: Who Spies on the spy-masters? (New Zealand Herald, Friday, December 11, 1998) The cloak-and-dagger brigade is under scrutiny after a Court of Appeal ruling. NICK SMITH reports on the issue of national security and justice. Espionage, sabotage, terrorism - these are the threats that traditionally trouble the country's spy-masters, the Security Intelligence Service. But two years ago the meaning of national security was broadened by Parliament to include the "international well-being or economic well-being" of New Zealand. It is the multiple meanings behind the phrase "national security" that troubles judges at the Court of Appeal, who ruled that the SIS did not have the authority to break into the Christchurch home of political activist Abdul Aziz Choudry in 1996. The agency is still refusing to hand over 71 SIS documents relating to the illegal breakin or "Choudrygate" as some call it, with the Prime Minister claiming "public interest immunity". To hand over the documents could prejudice national security, said Jenny Shipley in her application to the court to keep the papers secret. The five judges - Justice Sir Ivor Richardson, Justice Thomas, Justice Sir Kenneth Keith, Justice Blanchard and Justice Tipping - say they have the authority to compel the service to provide the documents to the court but have given the Crown until February to explain how national security is prejudiced. As Justice Thomas said in his separate judgement: "The courts today are not prepared to be awe-struck by the mantra of national security." The judges say they must balance the public interests of national security against those of justice. Justice Thomas said some SIS spies might be "overzealous in their perception of the secrecy which is required." Furthermore, the spy-masters are "unlikely" to have a complete understanding of the competing public interests which the law seeks to protect," he said. Implicit in the judge's comments is the contention that the cloak-and-dagger brigade may not have the best interests of everyone at heart. It was public pressure in 1996 that forced the government to amend legislation to expressly forbid the SIS from covert operations purely for political purposes. So who is spying on the spies to ensure they abide by the rules? And how effective are they? At a political level, there is the Intelligence and Security Committee, a panel of MPs, which meets this week to discuss the Court of Appeal decision, including deciding whether to ask Parliament to give the SIS the power to break into homes in the name of national security. After all, Australian, Canadian and British spies have explicit powers to enter private property but New Zealand spies, who appear to have been left out in the legislative cold, do not. The committee, established in 1996, has met twice this year and in its report to Parliament it says it has nothing to report, despite a veritable forest expended on the publication of articles in the press devoted to "Choudrygate". "The Intelligence and Security Committee has conducted the financial reviews of the 1997-98 performance and current operations of the GCSB (Government Communications Security Bureau) and the SIS and has no matters to bring to the attention of the House", it said. The exact same words, apart from the date, appeared in the committee's first report last year. Besides the committee, there is the Inspector-General, Laurie Greig, a retired High Court judge who investigates complaints against the SIS and has wide-ranging powers to assess the service's compliance with the law and the propriety of spies' actions. He investigated Mr Choudry's complaint and decided that the SIS' actions were "lawful, reasonable and justified". The Court of Appeal has now ruled that the actions were unlawful because the "power of entry or breaking and entering of private premises is not implicit" in the warrant that was signed by Jim Bolger when he was Prime Minister "authorizing the interception or seizure of any communication." Alliance justice spokesperson Matt Robson said the case showed that SIS' powers can be misused. "Mr Choudry is not a terrorist", he said. "[Mr Choudry] is in fact publicly known for his opposition to free trade. "When opposing the extended definitions of security, we said it could be used by the SIS to spy on those in the community opposed to the current Government economic policies [and] we have been proved right." The Privacy Commissioner, Bruce Slane, has called for rules governing the reasons the SIS collects information, and guidelines on how the information is stored and for how long. Justice Thomas has expressly rejected the Crown contention that judges are ill-equipped to "appreciate and evaluate the gravity and nature of risks to national security, the nuances and intuitive deductions which are part and parcel of intelligence work". Judges knew the limits of their knowledge and would err on the side of caution, said Justice Thomas. "The court's responsibility cannot be performed and the community's expectations fulfilled unless the court has a clear picture as to where along the spectrum of national security concerns the various documents fall." The New Zealand Herald Editorial (11 December 1998) Make SIS answer to court An Appeal Court ruling this week that a Security Intelligence Service interception warrant did not give agents power to enter a private residence was dusted with a touch of spice. Said Justice Thomas: "Courts today are not prepared to be awestruck by the mantra of national security". That is good to hear. Sir Guy Powles, in his review of the service in 1976, acknowledged that the law should allow the service to use otherwise illegal methods to obtain essential information in the interests of the country's security. However, he said that "the law should insist on strict criteria being satisfied and on the decision being taken by the person who bears final responsibility, that is the minister. Should it be the minister? The courts might not be "awestruck by the mantra of national security" but the implication is that politicians are. In August, the Prime Minister claimed that producing documents about the case would be prejudicial to defence and security. A High Court judge ruled that was not good enough, reserving the right to make a decision on his own inspection of the documents. Now comes the Appeal Court ruling on the limitations of an interception warrant. It does not take a big leap from such decisions to come to the conclusion that courts should be the vehicle for issuing warrants to the security service. Certainly, if the SIS is to receive legislative sanction for covert entry, applications should be heard, in camera, before at least two High Court judges. The court has in effect, challenged the Prime Minister's oversight role already. That is healthy. Let's keep the service in robust good health by requiring it to seek prior sanction from the Judiciary for intrusive activities. Letters to Editor letters@herald.co.nz From ppc at philonline.com Fri Dec 11 13:09:11 1998 From: ppc at philonline.com (ppc) Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1998 12:09:11 +0800 Subject: [asia-apec 963] ICAG Statement Message-ID: <199812110409.MAA02513@fiesta.philonline.com.ph> Dear Friends, Enclosed for your information is the final conference statement of the International Conference on Alternatives to Globalization (ICAG) co-sponsored by Bayan-Philipines and the IBON Foundation, Inc. --------------------------------------------------------- CONFERENCE STATEMENT Approved on November 9, 1998 and finalized for style by the Organizing Committee We, as individuals and groups from 32 countries in Asia and the Pacific, Latin America, Africa, Europe and North America, representing people's movements, networks, organizations, centers, institutes and academe, have come together in the International Conference on Alternatives to Globalization with the following objectives: first, to seek a deeper understanding of the global economic crisis and its causes; second, on the basis of our shared views and experiences, to explore and develop alternative strategies and paradigms in confronting globalization and third, to develop linkages for cooperation and exchange. Directly linked to the crisis is globalization - the neoliberal offensive of contemporary monopoly capitalism to maximize the extraction of profit. To this end, globalization uses modern technology (such as robotics and information technology) and the political prescriptions - liberalization, deregulation and privatization - of the triad multilateral institutions, the International Monetary Fund (IMF), World Bank (WB) and World Trade Organization (WTO). Globalization has worsened the effects of the destructive paradigm of "growth and development." Instead of economic prosperity and social stability that it promised for all nations, globalization has brought about economic turmoil, political and social tension, and widespread devastation to the world's peoples and resources. The myth of globalization has thus been fully exposed and debunked. The impacts of the global crisis are all so clearly seen today. The gap between the rich and poor in all nations, industrial and non-industrial alike, and between the rich and poor countries is widening rather than narrowing. Moreover, with the trend towards mergers and acquisitions, increasingly much more wealth - and power - is being concentrated in the hands of fewer monopoly capitalists who control the transnational corporations (TNCs). The systematic assaults on labor is dissipating the working class gains, causing widespread unemployment, job insecurity, loss of benefits, the destruction of trade unions. The massive displacement of workers leads to the rise and further commodification of migrant workers. Globalization has intensified landlessness, resulting in rural unemployment and penury. The peasants' limited gains in their struggle for genuine agrarian reform are likewise being reversed. Exploitation of women labor, especially unpaid labor, in farms and factories is intensified. The crisis causes more women and children to be displaced, commodified and economically and sexually exploited as modern-day slaves. Patriarchy remains a key problem and physical violence on women and children, both inside and outside the home, is prevalent. The indigenous people's struggle for the recognition of their right to self-determination, of the right of those peoples who seek equal citizenship in their countries, and their rights to ancestral or historical land is rendered more difficult. In many instances their very survival is being threatened by environmental degradation, mainly caused by TNCs, and by the state policies of disguised genocide. Global environmental abuse is being accelerated primarily by globalization. The ill effects include climate change, ozone depletion, air and water pollution, ocean resource depletion and pollution, deforestation, extinction of species and dangerous genetic manipulation. All these problems are arising because of the irrational pursuit of profit by rampaging capitalism. Everywhere globalization is eroding the gains of social movements in all aspects, political, social and cultural. There is a general regression of democracy, as economic impositions by states entail increasing militarization and violations of human rights, not only of economic, social and cultural rights, but of political and civil rights as well. In the third world, as the majority of the people are marginalized economically, they are also disempowered politically. State power is, more than ever, being used to step up the implementation of the neoliberal prescriptions of globalization, in the form of national legislation, bilateral agreements with IMF and WB, multilateral pacts under the WTO regime, and regional and other arrangements. The very proponents of globalization have acknowledged that the crisis now embroils the global capitalist system. They warn of further worsening of the crisis even as they concede failure to find a solution to the current global crisis. Far from nearing its end, the crisis threatens to get even worse. As the drive for liberalization, deregulation and privatization is pushed to the maximum - via the Multilateral Agreement on Investment (MAI) and the WTO - the situation can only deteriorate further. The crisis has heightened opposition to globalization among the adversely affected peoples, both organized and unorganized, in all regions of the world. This is expressed in the growth of militant mass movements that are becoming more coordinated with various forms of resistance and advocacy work, as well as spontaneous protest actions. The International Conference on Alternatives to Globalization is one manifestation of this growing opposition. It is a closing of ranks of diverse movements and initiatives toward more effective resistance to globalization. United in resisting and rejecting globalization, we are determined to pursue, both through our independent and unified initiatives, effective strategies and models of economic and social development. Over the long term, we shall strive to assert the people's sovereignty and develop alternative paradigms that uphold and safeguard the peoples' interests, rights, welfare and values, ensure sovereign control over their natural and human resources, guarantee economic democracy, democratic governance, and their right to determine their destiny. In the short term, we shall take steps to strengthen the capacities of peoples and communities to defend themselves against the onslaughts of globalization. We shall take recourse, principally, in expanding and strengthening our organizations, sustaining education and pursuing actions of resistance and struggle that have been proven effective, while we explore and develop new ones as conditions may require. Specifically, we call for the following urgent actions: -Expose and oppose the MAI and prevent its negotiation within the WTO by immediately launching sustained national and international campaigns. Work for the withdrawal of the harmful agreements on agriculture and TRIPs from the WTO. -Campaign for the non-payment of foreign loans by nations in crisis. Oppose the signing of new letters of intent with the IMF and reject all onerous loan conditionalities. -Oppose foreign military intervention in the internal affairs of nations as it violates their sovereignty and right to self-determination. -Expose and oppose the intensifying environmental destruction and exploitation for TNC profit and support the OilWatch declaration against new fossil fuel exploration. -Expose and oppose the intensifying marginalization and exploitation of women's labor, the commodification and sexual violence on women and children, and the use of rape as a tool of militarism. We are determined to expand, intensify and sustain worldwide resistance against globalization. Separately and together, we shall consistently wage militant struggles until we defeat this modern scourge. (end) BAYAN (Bagong Alyansang Makabayan or New Patriotic Alliance) No. 23 Maamo Street, Sikatuna Village Quezon City, PHILIPPINES Telephone: (63-2) 435-9151 Telefax: (63-2) 922-5211 Email: Bayan webpage URL: http://www.bigfoot.com/~bayan-phils IBON Foundation Inc. 3/F SCC Bldg. 4427 Int. Old Sta. Mesa, Manila 1008, Philippines Tel (00-63-2) 713-2737 / 713-2729 Fax (00-63-2) 716-0108 http://www.ibon.org From rverzola at phil.gn.apc.org Fri Dec 11 11:55:08 1998 From: rverzola at phil.gn.apc.org (Roberto Verzola) Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1998 11:55:08 Subject: [asia-apec 964] Will there be an APEC meeting in 1999 Message-ID: <199812110433.MAA06667@phil.gn.apc.org> >Already the obituarists have written off Apec '99, Auckland $44 >million debut on the international stage. And the jamboree has not >even begun. By late 1999, the problems due to the Y2K crisis will be very much in the public mind, occasional panics will happen more often, and APEC will be a minor issue. I would suggest that NGOs take more seriously what computers experts are saying about the Y2K crisis and how it will interact with and worsen the global financial crisis. It happened to us in the Philippines in 1986, those of us who talked about "crisis" and "revolution" and yet many of us missed it when the EDSA revolution took place. I'm afraid a similar thing is happening regarding the year 2000, when many of us talk about "crisis" and "paradigm shift" in the abstract and yet are doing very little to prepare our organizations and activists to play decisive and leading roles when the crisis that is looming before us really hits hard sometime late 1999. Roberto Verzola Philippine Greens From jaggi at tao.ca Sat Dec 12 06:18:32 1998 From: jaggi at tao.ca (Jaggi Singh) Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1998 16:18:32 -0500 (EST) Subject: [asia-apec 965] Anwar Ibrahim and APEC (fwd) Message-ID: The following was posted to the Student Activist Network listserv based mainly in North America. For the record, while the post is critical of Anwar`s unabashed free market views, that`s not meant to imply that somehow he deserves what is now happening to him. It is clear that the case against Anwar is a farce and unjust. However, much of the West`s whining about Anwar recently has been incredibly self-serving and hypocritical. -- JBS ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Thu, 10 Dec 1998 14:24:42 -0400 (AST) From: Penny Mc Call Howard Subject: san: Anwar Ibrahim and APEC Completely randomly, I came across this pro-APEC speech by Anwar Ibrahim, the Malaysian guy recently made the focus of "pro-human rights comments" by al gore and jean chretien at APEC 1998 in Malaysia. Interesting to note that despite all the rhetoric, they were simply wanting to protect their buddies. Penny. ********************************************************************* Remarks by Anwar Ibrahim at the World Economic Forum, Davos, Switzerland, 28 January 1995. Will APEC be East Asia's Future Growth Engine? It is very important to stress, although it may be stating the obvious to some, that APEC was conceived as a means to make the most from the booming economies of East Asia. There is no doubt that East Asian countries will gain tremendous benefits from APEC, but we must not be under the illusion that they wish to confine their dealings to members of APEC. The European Union will remain a major trading partner and constructive engagement between the two will continue. We in ASEAN have agreed to pursue the proposal to hold an East Asia-Europe Summit in Singapore sometime next year. We are also vigorously looking into the emerging markets -- South Asia, Latin America and South Africa. APEC will never be transformed into an exclusivist bloc, as feared by some, as such a move will be vehemently opposed by its East Asian members. East Asian countries have prospered through open multilateral trade and it would be detrimental to their own interests to undermine the very foundation of their economic achievement. Neither would any one of them, I believe, take kindly to the slightest indication to use APEC as an instrument for any of its members to pursue her geopolitical objectives. The precise Malaysian position is to help make it clear at the outset what APEC should not be, that no member should entertain the idea of APEC as an instrument of trade leverage to meet the narrow agenda of member countries, neither should it be a substitute to the multilateral trading system under the WTO. One must not lose sight of the fact that growth in the level of economic interaction in the Asia-Pacific, led by private sector, has preceded any kind of institutionalization. Malaysia is all for further growth in economic and other relationships in the Asia-Pacific in which the private sector has shown its capability to lead. Economic history has proven the benefits of free markets and open competition in bringing about prosperity, and the cost of clumsy over-intervention by government which has, more often than not, stymied growth. The Bogor declaration has proven that APEC has the capacity to become a force to serve the cause of free trade and our support for it must be unqualified. Yet one must not forget that while the benefits of free trade are obvious, the passage to it is seldom plain sailing. Today the strongest resistance against liberalization has more often than not come from institutionalized industrial and agricultural interests and union lobbies in North America and Europe. Malaysia for one is all for liberalization and in recent years we have progressively liberated the economy as well as our trade, in the belief that this would ensure our sustained growth in the long term and, more importantly, ensure the sharing of wealth. In the APEC context, there is appreciation of different stages and levels of development and certain counries must be given the opportunity and the time to undertake adjustments. Thus any schedule that involves the imposition on the sovereign rights of any country would mar the spirit of consensus which should be the mode in APEC's deliberations. Constructive consultation and continued engagement must be the modus operandi to arrive at true commitment. We all have, after all, made commitments under the GATT, however arduous the process and we must now all, under the aegis of the WTO, fulfill our obligations. The challenge before the Osaka Summit this year is not only to come up with measures to accelerate the integration of economies of the Asia-Pacific region, but also to vigorously draw into the development mainstream many economies within East Asia which until now had been on the periphery. This is very important to avoid the perception that APEC is only a club for the super rich and the nouveaux riches. Thus we must be committed to reduce economic disparities within the region. The peace in Indo China must be made to work through economic growth; inward-looking regimes must be constructively engaged. We must also look beyond East Asia to forge partnerships with the reforming economies in South Asia. We believe that the diffusion of growth can be effectively accelerated through open regionalism. Within Asean, we have seen the enormous potential of growth in the less developed areas of member countries through the establishment of regional growth triangles. Similarly, the establishment of AFTA is a regional initiative to facilitate the passage of economic liberalization in Asean. We believe it is only through this stage by stage approach rather than an impulsive headlong rush that we can make substantial progress in economic liberalization. Malaysia's proposal, now adopted by Asean, to establish the East Asia Economic Caucus (EAEC) as a strong voice for open regionalism and free trade would certainly complement APEC objectives. Finally, while the focus in APEC and in similar efforts is primarily economic, we must not lose sight of the fact that development is a multifaceted endeavour. As the economic integration of the region progresses, we must have the confidence to deal with complex issues of society and culture. The economic cooperation in the Pacific can provide a workable basis for increased understanding and enriching intercultural engagement. Thank you. From jaggi at tao.ca Sat Dec 12 07:30:34 1998 From: jaggi at tao.ca (Jaggi Singh) Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1998 17:30:34 -0500 (EST) Subject: [asia-apec 966] APEC $$$ (fwd) Message-ID: Bottomline: APEC 1997 cost C$55 million. That doesn't include the PCC. -- JBS ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1998 16:02:01 -0500 We finally received a response from the government to a question on the Order Paper (Oct 97) about the costs of APEC. Thought this information would interest you. Gary Evans Adjoint l=E9gislatif pour le d=E9put=E9 Svend Robinson Legislative Assistant to Svend Robinson, MP t=E9l (613) 996-5599, fax (613) 992-5501 robins0@parl.gc.ca *************************************************** QUESTIONS ON THE ORDER PAPER Mr. Peter Adams (Parliamentary Secretary to Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, for the benefit of the table, because of the dates on the documents, Question No. 145 which was yesterday's question will be answered today. Therefore, Questions Nos. 32 and 145 will be answered today. Question No. 32-Mr. Svend J. Robinson: With regards to Canada's involvement in APEC: (a) how much funding in total has been budgeted by the federal government for all the official APEC events and related APEC activities taking place in Canada; (b) which departments are financially responsible for which APEC events; (c) how much will each individual department spend on APEC; (d) what is the amount budgeted for direct and indirect costs incurred during the APEC leaders meeting in Vancouver; (e) how much is APEC itself contributing toward APEC related events; (f) how much revenue are these events expected to generate; and (g) what is the total contribution made by corporations to the financing of APEC, broken down by amount and name of corporation? Mr. Peter Adams (Parliamentary Secretary to Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, Lib.): I am informed by several departments as follows: (a) The total Canadian government expenditures for the APEC summit and related APEC events including contributions of various government departments which helped organize the Vancouver APEC summit, as well as the five separate APEC ministerial and four senior officials' meetings held in Victoria, Edmonton, Quebec, Montreal, Banff, Toronto and Ottawa in 1997 were $55 million. (b) A list of departments and events follows: Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade, responsible for APEC economic leaders meeting, AELM, and trade ministers meeting in Montreal; Environment Canada, responsible for the APEC environment ministerial meeting in Toronto and the environmental affairs program at the AELM in Vancouver; Health Canada, responsible for medical services at the AELM in Vancouver; Industry Canada, responsible for the APEC small and medium enterprise ministerial meeting in Ottawa; National Defence, responsible for the provision of ground transportation, communications, ceremonial guard and other support at the AELM in Vancouver; Natural Resources Canada, responsible for the APEC energy ministerial meeting in Edmonton; Public Works and Government Services Canada, responsible for provision of office space and assisting in obtaining goods and services in respect to the AELM in Vancouver; Revenue Canada, responsible for the subcommittee on customs procedures, SCCP, meetings in Victoria, B.C., Quebec City and Banff, the customs-industry symposium in Montreal and support for the AELM in Vancouver; Solicitor General Canada, responsible for security at the AELM in Vancouver; and Transport Canada, responsible for the APEC transportation ministerial meeting in Victoria. (c) Amounts spent by the departments on APEC follow: Foreign Affairs and International Trade spent $25 million on APEC. Environment Canada spent $1,165,400. Health Canada spent $384,000. Industry Canada spent $1,670,990. National Defence spent $3,200,000. Natural Reources Canada spent $1,185,048. Public Works and Government Services Canada spent $1,575,000. Revenue Canada spent $1,995,900. Solicitor General Canada spent $17,300,000 and Transport Canada spent $1,595,401. (d) Amounts budgeted for the APEC leaders meeting in Vancouver are as follows: Foreign Affairs and International trade budgeted $27.6 million; Environment Canada, $30,000; Health Canada, $384,000; National Defence, $4,300,000; Public Works and Government Services Canada, $1,575,000; Revenue Canada, $408,400; and Solicitor General Canada, $17,300,000. (e) The APEC Secretariat in Singapore does not contribute to the cost of APEC events per se. With the exception of APEC economic leaders and ministers, all APEC delegates and media covered their own costs. (f) The Vancouver Tourism Office conducted in the spring of 1997 a study which showed that the APEC Leaders is expected to generate $23 million in direct revenue. (g) Private sector sponsorship for the APEC summit in Vancouver amounted to $7,160,602 in cash and in kind. A total of $8.95 million was raised from corporate sponsors, with the agreement that 20% would be devoted to events associated with Canada's year of Asia Pacific, CYAP(1). The names of corporations and amounts are: Presenters, Diamond sponsors, $500,000: BC Telecom Inc., official telecommunications provider for APEC '97, $500,000; Canadian Airlines International Ltd., official airline for APEC '97 and CYAP, $350,000; Export Development Corporation, EDC, $520,000; Federal Express Canada Ltd., official courier of APEC '97 and CYAP, $500,000; General Motors of Canada Ltd., official vehicle supplier of APEC '97 and CYAP, $500,000; IBM Canada Ltd., official computer suplier of APEC '97 and CYAP, $500,000; Nortel, official telecommuications equipment supplier of APEC '97, $500,000; and Sun Life Assurance Company of Canada, $337,230. Toronto-Dominion Bank, $500,164. Benefactors, platinum sponsors, $250,000: Bell Canada, $200,000; Corel Corporation, official software provider for APEC '97 and CYAP, $250,000; National Glass Ltd., $259,108; Panasonic, Matsushita of Canada Ltd., official provider of electronic security equipment for APEC '97 and CYAP, $250,000; Power Corporation of Canada, $250,000; Royal Bank of Canada, $270,000; TransCanada Pipelines, $250,000; and Westcoast Energy Inc., $250,000. Partners, gold sponsors, $100,000: Atco Ltd. and Canadian Utilities Limited, $100,000; Aviscar Inc., official rental car supplier of APEC '97 and CYAP, $100,000; Alcan Inc., $100,000; BC Hydro and Power Authority, $100,000; Bank of Montreal, $150,000; Bombardier Inc., $150,000; Canadian Glacier Waters Inc., official water supplier of APEC '97 and CYAP, $80,000; Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce, $150,000; Canadian National, $100,000; Canadian Pacific, $150,000; Hongkong Bank of Canada, $150,000; Inco Ltd., $100,000; Laidlaw Incorporated, official shuttle service of APEC '97, $100,000; Moore Corporation Limited, official printer of APEC '97, $100,000; Nova Corporation, $120,000; Rogers Cable TV, British Columbia, official cable television supplier of APEC '97, $100,000; Scotiabank, $125,000; Vancouver Stock Exchange, $100,000. Patrons, silver sponsors, $50,000: Atomic Energy of Canada Limited, $50,000; BC Gas, $50,000; Boeing, $50,000; CGA Canada, $45,000; Gordon Capital Corporation, $80,000; IPL-Consumer Gas, $50,000; Newbridge Networks Corp., $50,000; Placer Dome Inc., $50,000; and Motorola Cellular Canada Limited, $50,000. Contributors, bronze sponsors, $20,000: AGRA International Limited, $15,000; Canadian Pulp and Paper Association, $10,000; Delta Hotels and Resorts, $30,000; Honeywell Incorporated, $15,000; InfoWest Services Inc., $15,000; Kinko's Corporate, $15,000; MDS Inc., $15,000; MacDonald Dettwiler and Associates Ltd., $15,000; PICS SmartCard Inc., $25,000; Pacific Western Brewing Company, $25,000; Panther Management Limited, $12,500; Sasktel, $15,000; Saakatchewan Wheat Pool, $15,000; TELUS Corporation, $25,000; Roots, $8,750; Sandman Hotels, $3,000; and Syncrude Canada Ltd., $5,000. Note (1): With Canada being the host of Asia Pacific Economic Co-operation, APEC, Canada's year of Asia Pacific, CYAP, was created to increase Canadian's awareness of Canada's relationship with Asia Pacific. The mandate of the cultural component of CYAP was to create a national cultural program that would enhance Canada's relationship with Asia Pacific economies by presenting the best traditional and contemporary arts of the region, while also promoting awareness and understanding of the culture of over two million Canadians of Asia Pacific origin. Funds were used for publicity, travel grants for performers from the Asia Pacific region to Canada, and other outreach programs. From gattwd at corso.ch.planet.gen.nz Sat Dec 12 14:59:17 1998 From: gattwd at corso.ch.planet.gen.nz (Gatt Watchdog) Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1998 17:59:17 +1200 Subject: [asia-apec 967] Re: Apec In-Reply-To: <01J59C01ATJYAAW17O@csc.canterbury.ac.nz> Message-ID: >From w.rosenberg@cantva.canterbury.ac.nz Sat Dec 12 17:38:24 1998 Received: by corso.ch.planet.gen.nz (1.65/waf) via UUCP; Sat, 12 Dec 98 17:56:06 +1200 for gattwd Received: from cantva.canterbury.ac.nz (SYSTEM@cantva.canterbury.ac.nz [132.181.30.3]) by tofu.ch.planet.gen.nz (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id RAA07284 for ; Sat, 12 Dec 1998 17:38:24 +1300 (NZDT) Received: from billr ("port 1403"@bill.csc.canterbury.ac.nz [132.181.30.84]) by csc.canterbury.ac.nz (PMDF V5.2-27 #32514) with SMTP id <01J59C019Q64AAW17O@csc.canterbury.ac.nz> for gattwd@corso.ch.planet.gen.nz; Sat, 12 Dec 1998 17:47:53 +1300 (NEW ZEALAND DAYLIGHT TIME) Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1998 17:46:13 +1100 From: Bill Rosenberg Subject: Apec To: gattwd@corso.ch.planet.gen.nz Reply-to: w.rosenberg@cantva.canterbury.ac.nz Message-id: <01J59C01ATJYAAW17O@csc.canterbury.ac.nz> Organization: Computer Services Centre, Canterbury Univer MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v2.54) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Priority: normal Comments: Authenticated sender is Aziz Just picked this up from the NZ Herald Web site and thought you may not have seen it. Cheers Bill News 03/12/98 Apec bonanza looks unlikely Hosting next year's Apec summit is not likely to be a big money-spinner for a sluggish New Zealand economy. An analysis by economic consultants Infometrics cautiously suggests the international bunfight might inject only $27 million into the local economy. That is despite the Government diverting $44.5 million of its spending into the cost of hosting the Asia-Pacific Economic Co-operation forum, which ends with next September's leaders' summit in Auckland. The Infometrics figure is more downbeat than other assessments trumpeted by the Government and related bodies. It is much lower, for example, than the $64 million that the Tourism Board initially predicted would go directly into the New Zealand economy. The Infometrics study - done by Dr Adolf Stroombergen and released yes-terday - was commissioned by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs' special Apec taskforce and the Tourism Board. Copyright c New Zealand Herald From g2jomo at umcsd.um.edu.my Sat Dec 12 12:10:35 1998 From: g2jomo at umcsd.um.edu.my (Jomo) Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1998 11:10:35 +0800 Subject: [asia-apec 968] Re: Anwar Ibrahim and APEC (fwd) References: Message-ID: <3671DEA9.1C32E554@umcsd.um.edu.my> It's not clear to me what this posting is meant to prove. That Anwar is basically neo-liberal, he is, though endorsing the EAEC and some other subtle points in the text are hardly proof of 'unabashed free market views'. But you can find the same in Mahathir's speeches, albeit with less subtlety and often more forcefully. So what does the speech prove? Pray tell me. I would add that knee-jerk anti-market views are not going to get us very far. When protectionist policies are kept in place to enhance crony profits, etc, where do we stand? While the recent crisis is not primarily due to crony capitalism, crony capitalism is alive and well in the region despite IMF measures, and still very powerful, especially in Malaysia partly because we avoided IMF conditionalities. We need far more sophisticated and nuanced analyses of complex situations than the following trivial commentaries offer. Jaggi Singh wrote: > The following was posted to the Student Activist Network listserv > based > mainly in North America. For the record, while the post is critical > of > Anwar`s unabashed free market views, that`s not meant to imply that > somehow he deserves what is now happening to him. It is clear that > the > case against Anwar is a farce and unjust. However, much of the > West`s > whining about Anwar recently has been incredibly self-serving and > hypocritical. -- JBS > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > Date: Thu, 10 Dec 1998 14:24:42 -0400 (AST) > From: Penny Mc Call Howard > Subject: san: Anwar Ibrahim and APEC > > Completely randomly, I came across this pro-APEC speech by Anwar > Ibrahim, > the Malaysian guy recently made the focus of "pro-human rights > comments" > by al gore and jean chretien at APEC 1998 in Malaysia. > > Interesting to note that despite all the rhetoric, they were simply > wanting to protect their buddies. Penny. > > **************************************** > **************************** > Remarks by Anwar Ibrahim at the World Economic Forum, Davos, > Switzerland, > 28 January 1995. > > Will APEC be East Asia's Future Growth Engine? > > It is very important to stress, although it may be stating the > obvious to > some, that APEC was conceived as a means to make the most from the > booming > economies of East Asia. There is no doubt that East Asian countries > will > gain tremendous benefits from APEC, but we must not be under the > illusion > that they wish to confine their dealings to members of APEC. The > European > Union will remain a major trading partner and constructive > engagement > between the two will continue. We in ASEAN have agreed to pursue the > > proposal to hold an East Asia-Europe Summit in Singapore sometime > next > year. We are also vigorously looking into the emerging markets -- > South > Asia, Latin America and South Africa. > > APEC will never be transformed into an exclusivist bloc, as feared > by > some, as such a move will be vehemently opposed by its East Asian > members. > East Asian countries have prospered through open multilateral trade > and it > would be detrimental to their own interests to undermine the very > foundation of their economic achievement. Neither would any one of > them, I > believe, take kindly to the slightest indication to use APEC as an > instrument for any of its members to pursue her geopolitical > objectives. > > The precise Malaysian position is to help make it clear at the > outset what > APEC should not be, that no member should entertain the idea of APEC > as an > instrument of trade leverage to meet the narrow agenda of member > countries, neither should it be a substitute to the multilateral > trading > system under the WTO. > > One must not lose sight of the fact that growth in the level of > economic > interaction in the Asia-Pacific, led by private sector, has preceded > any > kind of institutionalization. Malaysia is all for further growth in > economic and other relationships in the Asia-Pacific in which the > private > sector has shown its capability to lead. Economic history has proven > the > benefits of free markets and open competition in bringing about > prosperity, and the cost of clumsy over-intervention by government > which > has, more often than not, stymied growth. > > The Bogor declaration has proven that APEC has the capacity to > become a > force to serve the cause of free trade and our support for it must > be > unqualified. Yet one must not forget that while the benefits of free > trade > are obvious, the passage to it is seldom plain sailing. Today the > strongest resistance against liberalization has more often than not > come > from institutionalized industrial and agricultural interests and > union > lobbies in North America and Europe. > > Malaysia for one is all for liberalization and in recent years we > have > progressively liberated the economy as well as our trade, in the > belief > that this would ensure our sustained growth in the long term and, > more > importantly, ensure the sharing of wealth. In the APEC context, > there is > appreciation of different stages and levels of development and > certain > counries must be given the opportunity and the time to undertake > adjustments. Thus any schedule that involves the imposition on the > sovereign rights of any country would mar the spirit of consensus > which > should be the mode in APEC's deliberations. Constructive > consultation and > continued engagement must be the modus operandi to arrive at true > commitment. We all have, after all, made commitments under the GATT, > > however arduous the process and we must now all, under the aegis of > the > WTO, fulfill our obligations. > > The challenge before the Osaka Summit this year is not only to come > up > with measures to accelerate the integration of economies of the > Asia-Pacific region, but also to vigorously draw into the > development > mainstream many economies within East Asia which until now had been > on the > periphery. This is very important to avoid the perception that APEC > is > only a club for the super rich and the nouveaux riches. Thus we must > be > committed to reduce economic disparities within the region. The > peace in > Indo China must be made to work through economic growth; > inward-looking > regimes must be constructively engaged. We must also look beyond > East Asia > to forge partnerships with the reforming economies in South Asia. > > We believe that the diffusion of growth can be effectively > accelerated > through open regionalism. Within Asean, we have seen the enormous > potential of growth in the less developed areas of member countries > through the establishment of regional growth triangles. Similarly, > the > establishment of AFTA is a regional initiative to facilitate the > passage > of economic liberalization in Asean. We believe it is only through > this > stage by stage approach rather than an impulsive headlong rush that > we can > make substantial progress in economic liberalization. Malaysia's > proposal, > now adopted by Asean, to establish the East Asia Economic Caucus > (EAEC) as > a strong voice for open regionalism and free trade would certainly > complement APEC objectives. > > Finally, while the focus in APEC and in similar efforts is primarily > > economic, we must not lose sight of the fact that development is a > multifaceted endeavour. As the economic integration of the region > progresses, we must have the confidence to deal with complex issues > of > society and culture. The economic cooperation in the Pacific can > provide a > workable basis for increased understanding and enriching > intercultural > engagement. > > Thank you. From gattwd at corso.ch.planet.gen.nz Sun Dec 13 07:31:30 1998 From: gattwd at corso.ch.planet.gen.nz (Gatt Watchdog) Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1998 10:31:30 +1200 Subject: [asia-apec 969] NZ: Apec and Botched SIS break-in Message-ID: <8q0e1e1w165w@corso.ch.planet.gen.nz> Sunday Star-Times Opinion, 13/12/98 We need spies we can trust New Zealand's spies have had it too easy for too long. Last week the Court of Appeal decided, rightly, to make their lives a little more difficult. The politician in charge of the SIS will no longer be able to fob off inquiring judges with a note saying, "National security - mind your own business". At last the spies and their political friends are being dragged towards the light. The particular case - the botched SIS burglary of a flat belonging to anti-Apec protester Aziz Choudry - is worrying for all the usual reasons. It was proof of the spies' howling incompetence. And it looks suspiciously political: harassment of dissidents rather than the pursuit of subversion. Prime Minister Shipley's vague and curt memo to the court trying to block further revelations does nothing to allay these suspicions. She may be able to fix the immediate problem, either by giving more detailed information to the judges or by allowing them to view SIS papers. This would set a helpful precedent. As Justice Thomas put it: "The courts today are not prepared to be awe-struck by the 'mantra' of national security." But much more radical changes are needed. The 1996 reforms were supposed to modernise the service and make it accountable. In some ways they made things worse. The new definition of security - it now includes the "international wellbeing or economic wellbeing" of New Zealand - is meaningless. It is a charter for abuse. The state religion changes from anticommunism to free trade, but the secret priesthood can still carry on persecuting unbelievers. The new intelligence watchdogs are gummy old mutts. The parliamentary committee is not allowed access to operational details; it is therefore powerless. The inspector-general's powers are limited. Interception warrants still require only the say-so of the PM. So a politician, temporarily perched atop the greasy pole, is expected to abandon the habits of a lifetime and act impartially in this highly political matter. If we must have an intelligence service - the point is arguable - it must be a new one. The SIS is hopelessly compromised by its history which combines bungling and excessive political zeal. With the collapse of communism, it lost 90% of its reason for existence. In a brilliant bureaucratic counter-attack, it saved its empire and gained a bogus new mission. A replacement service would be much smaller and it would have a civilian chief. Our spymasters have usually been former military men; their background in the authoritarian culture of the services should actually have disqualified them. MPs on the oversight committee would have automatic access to operational details, as would the inspector-general. Judges, not politicians, would issue interception warrants. Then we might finally have a spy service we could trust. Letters to the editor: feedback@star-times.co.nz From gattwd at corso.ch.planet.gen.nz Sun Dec 13 10:25:39 1998 From: gattwd at corso.ch.planet.gen.nz (Gatt Watchdog) Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1998 13:25:39 +1200 Subject: [asia-apec 970] More on APEC and NZ Spies Message-ID: Evening Post, Wellington, December 12 1998 SIS activities under wraps By Guyon Espiner, Political reporter Anti-free trade activists want to know how many homes the SIS has broken into but senior politicians responsible for the intelligence agency are staying mum. Activist Aziz Choudry, whose home was entered by two SIS officers in July 1996 while he was attending a conference expressing concerns about trade liberalisation said it was "very unlikely" his was the only home targeted. The Appeal Court ruled this week that an SIS interception warrant didn't give the agency the right to enter a private home. Both he and Canterbury University lecturer Dr David Small, who caught the two SIS officers entering the house, also want to know whether former Prime Ministers were led to believe the SIS had the right to enter private homes. "My hunch is that the SIS have been breaking into people's houses for years and...they were selective as to whom they told" Dr Small said. Former Labour Prime Ministers Mike Moore and David Lange refused to comment on any aspect of the SIS when contacted by The Post. Mr Moore said being a member of the Intelligence and Security Committee of Parliamentarians which oversees the activities of the SIS meant he could not comment on the issue. Labour leader Helen Clark, another committee member, also refused to comment. A spokeswoman for Prime Minister Jenny Shipley said yesterday that the committee had met on Thursday to consider the policy implications of the Choudry case and were seeking further advice. New Zealand first leader Winston Peters, who lost his position on the committee after being sacked as Treasurer and Deputy Prime Minister, said he had believed the SIS did not have the powers to enter private homes without permission. Brooklyn woman, Shirley Smith, whose late husband William Sutch stood trial and was acquitted for spying in 1975, said that back at that time the SIS had waited outside their house while police with a search warrant looked through their home and found nothing. "They (the SIS) didn't believe that they were entitled to come in without the permission of the householder," she said. Mrs Shipley has hinted the law may need amending to give the SIS such power. Mr Choudry said he was concerned the government may push for greater powers for the SIS in the lead-up to next September's APEC meeting in Auckland. Letters to the editor editor@evpost.co.nz From gattwd at corso.ch.planet.gen.nz Sun Dec 13 12:32:36 1998 From: gattwd at corso.ch.planet.gen.nz (Gatt Watchdog) Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1998 15:32:36 +1200 Subject: [asia-apec 971] NZ/APEC-related "intelligence" agency story Message-ID: <2oNF1e1w165w@corso.ch.planet.gen.nz> >From The Dominion, Wellington, 10/12/1998 Shipley hints SIS may get access to private homes By Cathie Bell, Political Reporter Prime Minister Jenny Shipley indicated yesterday that the law might be changed to allow Security Intelligence Service agents to break into people's houses. The Appeal Court had ruled that an SIS interception warrant did not give agents the power to enter a private residence. It also ruled that a certificate from Mrs Shipley explaining why 70 documents from the SIS were withheld did not explain precisely enough the reasons for their being withheld. Justice Richardson, Justice Thomas, Justice Sir Kenneth Keith, Justice Blanchard and Justice Tipping ruled that Mrs Shipley had till February 1 to support a certificate that satisfied them, or to provide the documents for a judge to consider whether national security meant they needed to stay secret. Justice Thomas said that "courts today are not prepared to be awestruck by the mantra of national security". Political activist Abdul Aziz Choudry had appealed against the High Court ruling that would not give him access to SIS documents. He is suing the SIS and its director, Brigadier Don McIvor, the officers involved, the Crown and the police for $150,000 for trespass or compensation for a breach of the Bill of Rights after two SIS officers were caught entering Mr Choudry's house in July 1996. Mrs Shipley said the Appeal court ruling had raised a question as to whether the law was sufficient. "I am expecting to receive further advice on that... and if there is any significant implication I would expect to convene the parliamentary committee that looks into these matters and allow them to consider it further." The committee was the right forum in which any "broad-based discussions of a law change" needed to take place, she said. The committee was likely to meet this week. The judgment noted that Australia, Canada, and Britain had legal provisions to allow intelligence agents to enter private property. A spokeswoman for Brigadier McIvor said the Appeal Court judgment raised some complex issues. "We will be studying it with the Crown's legal advisers and then we will be briefing our minister," the spokeswoman said. Mr Choudry said the judgment was positive and people felt that it vindicated the concerns of activists. It confirmed that people who debated fair-trade issues and provided alternative analysis were now the target of counter-intelligence groups. "This has always been a concern of a number of people around the world, that criticising globalisation seems to have replaced 'reds under the beds' from the Cold War," Mr Choudry said. Alliance MP Rod Donald said the Appeal Court judges had acted as watchdogs of democracy and their judgment was a good one. Mrs Shipley's response reinforced the need to abolish the intelligence and security committee and restore to Parliament the scrutiny of those organisations. "Clearly, democracy has won and Mrs Shipley should accept the outcome with good grace and not be tempted to change the law to suit her needs, Mr Donald said. Letters to the editor: letters@dominion.co.nz From gattwd at corso.ch.planet.gen.nz Mon Dec 14 05:44:40 1998 From: gattwd at corso.ch.planet.gen.nz (Gatt Watchdog) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 08:44:40 +1200 Subject: [asia-apec 972] NZ Herald Article on APEC Message-ID: <6gZg1e1w165w@corso.ch.planet.gen.nz> Published in NZ Herald 9/12/98 ARMY EXERCISES AT AUCKLAND UNIVERSITY Virginia Pitts (explains why the army presence on campus compromises the principle of academic freedom) Why do army exercises at the Auckland University campus provoke strong opposition from many staff and students? Surely it is acceptable for the university administration to permit these exercises as a "goodwill gesture" towards the army. After all, both are legally-constituted, taxpayer-funded public institutions. And unlike armies in less benign countries, the New Zealand Army does not have a reputation for oppression. If these ideas seem commonsensical, their apparent logic evaporates under closer inspection. Although the army and the university are both taxpayer-supported institutions, they perform very different roles in a democracy. The university is bound by the Education Act of 1989 to be a `critic and conscience' of society. This requires that academic freedom not be compromised in any way. Given that a primary function of the army is to enforce government policy, and a responsibility of the university is to uphold the freedom to analyse, and openly criticise government policy, there are times when the roles of the respective institutions can be seen to conflict. It follows that autonomy from the state is fundamental to the principle of academic freedom. By agreeing to host the army, the university administration creates a symbolic partnership between the two institutions which undermines the independent status required of a university. To view this "partnership" as little more than co-operation between two institutions working towards a common goal of public good is untenable. Moreover, the very notion that such a partnership is possible remains highly suspect. Partnership involves reciprocity and we can be sure that the army will not permit academics to conduct exercises of intellectual benefit on military bases. It is obvious, then, where the power resides in any such relationship between universities and the army. Having applied considerable pressure for an explanation of the army presence on campus, some university staff were informed by administration that the exercises were "a one-off" associated with security preparations for the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation conference in September next year . They were told that the bomb squad were looking for mock bombs on a number of premises. Because universities are not a typical target for terrorists, and no APEC meetings will be held at Auckland University, the notion of the university being implicated in a bomb threat during APEC does not seem entirely credible. There will however be protests, some of which are likely to involve University students and staff. APEC-related security preparations on campus raise fears about a possible clamp-down on basic freedoms of speech and assembly during that conference. Such fears are not groundless. During the 1997 APEC summit at the University of British Columbia in Vancouver, Canadian police arbitrarily arrested student protesters, attacked them with disabling pepper spray, and confiscated their banners. Like the New Zealand Army, the Canadian police force does not have the reputation for being overtly oppressive. We should, therefore, be wary of placing excessive faith in the benignity of the state. Closer to home, there is growing evidence of government antagonism towards those who speak out against APEC policies. The Security Intelligence Service admits to having broken into the home of Mr. Aziz Choudry in Christchurch in 1996,when he and Dr. David Small were organizing a conference highlighting the negative aspects of APEC. More recently, Chileans resident in New Zealand have been contacted by the S.I.S to determine whether they intend to protest at next year's APEC meeting. Upon his recent return from the Asia Pacific People's Assembly conference in Kuala Lumpur, one student activist was questioned for an hour and a half by customs officials wanting to know his views on A.P.E.C. and related issues. . During the last two weeks, student activists opposed to free trade have been questioned by police at their homes. Student activists in Vancouver were also subjected to surveillance prior to the APEC meeting there. Documentation has since revealed that the Canadian government had given assurances that no sign of dissent would be visible to world leaders. Repercussions following this scandalous revelation include the resignation of a Canadian cabinet minister. It would be most unfortunate if the New Zealand government were to suffer a similar shame. Students and academics who have spoken out against APEC need to know they can rely on the independence of Auckland University. Because certain regulations exist to restrict the presence and activities of the SIS on campus, the university should remain alert to the possible implications of granting alternative government agencies access to its buildings. As evidenced by the Choudry case, government agencies are not above violating the privacy of law-abiding citizens. The university has a responsibility to safeguard potentially sensitive research material gathered by its staff. On Friday 4th December, the registrar's office was asked where and at what time the army were conducting exercises that day. The response was that they were not keeping track of the army's schedule, so had no knowledge of their whereabouts. On the previous evening, a member of staff encountered a soldier unlocking a room which was out of bounds to the army. Having pointed out the soldier's mistake, the staff-member noted there were no university security personnel in sight at that time. Both incidents suggest that closer monitoring of the visitors was in order. This is not to make unfounded accusations, but simply to point out that we can not be altogether certain of what is going on late at night in the university buildings while soldiers seek out mock bombs. How many rooms or offices are examined before they find what they are looking for? Such fears can not be dismissed as paranoid or alarmist. In the United States, the FBI has admitted to breaking into the offices of academics and removing files. We would not want to pave the way for such clandestine and unethical activities in this country. Legitimate fears are only fuelled by the conflicting reasons given for the army presence on campus. First it was a "goodwill gesture", the necessity of which could not be explained. Then, as APEC-related anti-terrorist activity, the exercises became about our own self-protection. Bordering on the ridiculous, an army spokeswoman, Sian Routledge, then explained to a Herald reporter that the university had been selected not for what it was but because it had different types of buildings. Despite there being no credible reason for conducting counter-terror operations in university settings, it is impossible to believe that the function of an institution would be completely ignored when selecting a site for military or police training. If, for example, a group of riot police were to conduct training exercises in a rest home on the basis of its architectural qualities, the reasoning would be dismissed as absurd. Their presence would, undoubtedly, be viewed as highly inconsiderate, contra the raison d'etre of the home and, consequently, rather mysterious. The same applies to the army presence on campus. The university and the army are not opponents, but neither institution can adequately perform its function with an open-door policy towards the other. In defence of the principle of academic freedom, the university must actively safeguard its autonomy from the state. This precludes granting building access to the armed forces of the state. The number of military personnel conducting exercises is irrelevant. Their officially condoned presence on campus sets an unacceptable precedent for similar liaisons in the future. In order to abide by the Education Act and maintain its credibility as a world-class tertiary institution, the University of Auckland should ensure that any future military presence on campus be restricted to clear emergencies only. Virginia Pitts is a Phd student at Auckland University From gattwd at corso.ch.planet.gen.nz Tue Dec 15 07:53:09 1998 From: gattwd at corso.ch.planet.gen.nz (Gatt Watchdog) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1998 10:53:09 +1200 Subject: [asia-apec 973] Spy law change - NZ Message-ID: The Press, Christchurch, NZ, 16/12/98 New law may let SIS agents enter houses By Cathie Bell In Wellington The Government is likely to introduce legislation this week to enable the Security Intelligence Service to enter people's homes. The Government is concerned that a Court of Appeal ruling that an SIS interception warrant did not give agents the power to enter people's houses would damage the ability of those agents to do their jobs properly. The prime ministerial committee which oversees the SIS, the Government Communications Bureau and the External Assessments Bureau, has been considering options to deal with the court's ruling. A spokeswoman for Prime Minister Jenny Shipley confirmed that a law change was an option being considered but said further consideration was needed before a decision on what to do would be made. She said that consideration did not require another meeting of the committee, made up of Mrs Shipley, Foreign Affairs Minister Don McKinnon, Labour leader Helen Clark, and Labour foreign affairs spokesman Mike Moore, and could probably be settled with a telephone call. "It's certainly possible it could be this week. The legislation will either be this week or next year." Miss Clark was unable to be contacted yesterday. Green party co-leader and Alliance MP Rod Donald said sources had told him the law change would be introduced today or tomorrow. He said it was outrageous that a week after the Appeal Court ruled it was illegal for SIS agents to enter people's houses, the Government was going to "ride roughshod" over that decision and introduce a bill to make it legal. Mr Donald said that was hasty and inappropriate. From gattwd at corso.ch.planet.gen.nz Tue Dec 15 13:01:51 1998 From: gattwd at corso.ch.planet.gen.nz (Gatt Watchdog) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1998 16:01:51 +1200 Subject: [asia-apec 974] NZ PM Press Release on APEC break-in case Message-ID: Amendment To NZSIS Legislation To Be Introduced Tuesday, 15 December 1998, 2:14 pm Press Release: New Zealand Government PRESS RELEASE FOR IMMEDIATE USE 15 December 1998 Government To Introduce Amendment To NZSIS Legislation The Government will introduce an amendment to legislation this week covering the operations of the New Zealand Security Intelligence Service, and will also seek to appeal part of the Choudry decision of the Court of Appeal, Prime Minister Jenny Shipley said today. "In Mr Choudry's case, the Court of Appeal pointed out the need for Parliament to provide express authority for the NZSIS to enter private premises, without permission, to intercept communications. "It is vital that the NZSIS is able to carry out its functions properly in gathering intelligence on security threats to New Zealand. In some rare instances, this may require covert entry to private property, which the amendment to the legislation will allow. The existing law had been presumed to allow this to occur. The Court has said if this is the intention, it should be made explicit as is the case in Canada, the United Kingdom and Australia." Mrs Shipley said the proposed amendment had been discussed by Cabinet, the Intelligence and Security Committee, the National Caucus and with the Leader of the Opposition. "A bill to amend the NZSIS Act will be tabled in the House, and will have its second reading tomorrow. An opportunity will be given for submissions to be made to the Intelligence and Security Committee before the Bill is considered again, early next year." Mrs Shipley said the Government would also seek leave to appeal against one aspect of the Court of Appeal's decision in Mr Choudry's case. The issue concerns the procedure the Court should follow when the Government asserts it is necessary, in the course of litigation against the Crown, to withhold from the Court, and other parties, access to information, in order to protect national security interests. "The Government considers it will be helpful to have the Privy Council's decision as to the respective roles of the Courts and Ministers in resolving such issues." Mrs Shipley said New Zealand cannot and must not assume it is immune from threats to its security. "The NZSIS must be provided with what it needs to carry out its responsibilities legally for gathering information on threats to New Zealand's security and these measures will help achieve that," the Prime Minister concluded. ENDS Home Page | Politics | Previous Story | Next Story From gattwd at corso.ch.planet.gen.nz Wed Dec 16 08:30:20 1998 From: gattwd at corso.ch.planet.gen.nz (Gatt Watchdog) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 11:30:20 +1200 Subject: [asia-apec 975] NZ Declares war on dissent Message-ID: <0gwk1e1w165w@corso.ch.planet.gen.nz> Corso Box 1375 Otepoti (Dunedin) Aotearoa (NZ) 15/12/1998 MEDIA RELEASE Proposed SIS Law Change "a declaration of war against dissent" "Moves by Jenny Shipley to ram a law change through under urgency to allow the Security Intelligence Service to "legally" break and enter private property is a declaration of war against dissent", says Corso National Coordinator Suzanne Menzies-Culling. "In fact, it is a declaration of war on all thinking New Zealanders". "For many years, Corso has supported the struggles of peoples throughout the world for their basic human rights and for justice. We have seen how repressive legislation has been used time and time again against people who have spoken out against government policies whether in Malaysia, Chile, India, or right here in the Pacific". "But similar kinds of repressive policies and laws are being used and abused by so-called democratic governments such as Canada, the USA, and New Zealand. The targets are often people who have spoken out against the violation of indigenous peoples' rights and the economic policies of governments which have embraced the free trade, free market agenda. After all, these intelligence agencies have to dream up new "threats" in order to justify their very existence." "Last week's Court of Appeal decision ruled unanimously that the SIS was acting outside of the law when it broke into Aziz Choudry's Christchurch house during an alternative forum on free trade which Corso supported." "It is quite clear that, for all its pontificating about New Zealand's good human rights record, that the government is so threatened by the exercise of our democratic rights of lawful dissent and advocacy that it effectively wants to deliver the SIS yet another carte blanche to carry out fishing expeditions on all New Zealanders." "In 1996, we warned that the expansion of SIS power to protect "New Zealand's economic wellbeing and international wellbeing" could well be interpreted to allow the SIS to target organisations, unions, academics and citizens which challenge the extremist freemarket policies of successive New Zealand governments. In spite of all the assurances from National and Labour that the SIS would not be used against people who are engaged in lawful advocacy or protest, it is quite clear that these counted for nothing." "We have already started informing our international networks about the SIS bungled break-in, and now this move of the New Zealand government. There is shock and outrage that a country which claims to be a model for open participatory democracy is so scared of debate on crucial issues that concern us all, that it will give the SIS even more powers against its critics. With APEC coming to New Zealand next year, it is quite clear that this move is an attempt to further silence dissent and to create the conditions for untold human rights abuses next year." "The government desperation to rush this through so quickly, without even due Parliamentary process, is an admission of defeat for them. All right-thinking people should be outraged at this, coming so soon after the 50th Anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights last week", concluded Ms Menzies- Culling. Contact: Suzanne Menzies-Culling ph (03) 477 3395 From gattwd at corso.ch.planet.gen.nz Wed Dec 16 08:34:55 1998 From: gattwd at corso.ch.planet.gen.nz (Gatt Watchdog) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 11:34:55 +1200 Subject: [asia-apec 976] NZ Media on Spy APEC story Message-ID: SIS LAW CHANGE FOR SIS AGENTS AN ATTACK ON PROTEST RIGHTS - CHOUDRY By NZPA political reporter Wellington, Dec 15 - The Government will introduce under urgency tomorrow a bill changing the law so Security Intelligence Service (SIS) agents can covertly enter private premises. The move has been damned as an infringement of New Zealanders' right of protest by anti-free trade activist Aziz Choudry, who won a Court of Appeal ruling last week on a bungled SIS break-in at his home. The court found the SIS interception warrant did not empower agents to enter private property without the permission of the owner. Today Mr Choudry said the proposed law change was an attempt to silence protesters. ``It is a declaration of war on dissent in New Zealand,'' Mr Choudry told NZPA. He accused the Government of wanting to clean up New Zealand of protesters before next year's Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (Apec) leaders' summit on free trade, to take place in Auckland and to be attended by world leaders including United States president Bill Clinton. ``We should be asking whether in 1998, in a country which supposedly is an open democracy, it is appropriate for some people to be targeted because of their views and their lawful actions in organising against things like Apec.'' Anti-Apec activists fully expected to be targeted by the SIS next year for protesting against the harms of free trade, he said. ``What is happening when we have a lack of tolerance in the Government, who are so desperate in their zeal to sell this image of New Zealand as being this wonderful model for the free market and free trade on the international stage next year, (is) that they just want to silence all opposition.'' Prime Minister Jenny Shipley announced the law change today and said the Government would also take an appeal to the Privy Council against part of the Court of Appeal decision concerning whether the Government can withhold information from court proceedings to protect national security interests. The Court of Appeal had invited the Crown to advise it by February 1 whether it proposed to file an amendment to the certificate provided by Mrs Shipley which claimed public interest immunity as the reason for withholding 70 SIS documents from the court. It said the certificate she provided was too vague. A spokesman for Labour leader Helen Clark said Labour would support the introduction of the bill amending the law and would support sending it to a select committee for submissions early next year. Labour would not comment further until tomorrow's debate, he said. Corso and the Green Party condemned the proposed law change as an outrageous infringement of the rights of law-abiding citizens. ``This new bill gives the SIS blanket powers to break into our homes if we hold a different view to the SIS and its masters about what is good for New Zealand,'' Alliance MP and Green co-leader Rod Donald said. Mrs Shipley said in a statement today that it was vital the SIS was able to carry out its functions in gathering information intelligence on security threats to New Zealand. ``In some rare instances, this may require covert entry to private property, which the amendment to the legislation will allow.'' ``The existing law had been presumed to allow this to occur. The court has said if this is the intention, it should be made explicit, as is the case in Canada, the United Kingdom and Australia.'' The proposed amendment is expected to be debated late tomorrow, with the House sitting under urgency. It will be sent on to the intelligence and security committee, which comprises Mrs Shipley, Miss Clark, Foreign Affairs Minister Don McKinnon, and Labour foreign affairs spokesman Mike Moore. NZPA PAR ams jaf mel 15/12/98 17-07NZ SIS-D/L SIS NEEDS TO BE ABLE TO ENTER PRIVATE HOMES `ON RARE OCCASIONS' Wellington, Dec 16 - Prime Minister Jenny Shipley said today Security Intelligence Service (SIS) agents needed to be able to enter private properties on ``very, very rare occasions'' in the interests of national security. ``... there are events in our history where it has been critical that this ability has been available,'' she said giving as an example the sabotage of the Rainbow Warrior. A bill changing the law so SIS agents can covertly enter private premises is due to be debated under urgency in Parliament today. Mrs Shipley said the bill would be referred to a select committee with public submissions heard in February. Anti-free trade activist Aziz Choudry, who won a Court of Appeal ruling last week on a bungled SIS break-in at his home, has damned the bill as an infringement of New Zealanders' right of protest. The court found the SIS interception warrant did not empower agents to enter private property without the permission of the owner. Under the bill, the minister responsible for the SIS is responsible for approving interception warrants. Labour supports the bill going to a select committee but leader Helen Clark said today her party wanted the power to issue interception warrants given to a High Court judge. ``I accept ... the old saying an Englishman's home is his castle. That is breached by the police with respect to warrants for certain activities. It is envisaged that the SIS will continue to have that power as it's always been assumed it had but I'm suggesting that there be a higher threshold in respect to who authorises that activity.'' Mrs Shipley said today on National Radio that submissions on this point would be considered. Miss Clark said the SIS was not being given greater powers to enter private homes under the bill. She told National Radio the High Court had upheld the traditional legal interpretation of what power the SIS was given but that had been overturned by the Court of Appeal. ``The Court of Appeal did not say that the SIS should not have that power. What it said was that it should be explicit in law.'' Governments in Australia, Britain and Canada had moved to make that power more explicit. ``The Appeal (Court) decision makes it important that New Zealand do that too.'' There had been few interception warrants signed out over the past few years. Mrs Shipley said yesterday the Government would also take an appeal to the Privy Council against part of the Court of Appeal decision concerning whether the Government can withhold information from court proceedings to protect national security interests. NZPA PAR sje gt 16/12/98 08-32NZ From gattwd at corso.ch.planet.gen.nz Wed Dec 16 11:39:41 1998 From: gattwd at corso.ch.planet.gen.nz (Gatt Watchdog) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 14:39:41 +1200 Subject: [asia-apec 977] GATT Watchdog on NZ SIS Law Change Committee Message-ID: MEDIA RELEASE FOR IMMEDIATE USE December 16 1998 SIS Law Change Committee Heavily Biased - GATT Watchdog GATT Watchdog says that it is unreasonable for people to take seriously the Prime Minister's assurances that public submissions on the bill which is intended to give the government's spy agency the right to break and enter homes will be considered before the legislation is passed. "The composition of the committee which she has named is identical to the current prime ministerial committee which includes Mrs Shipley, Don McKinnon, Helen Clark, and Mike Moore. All of these people have publicly stated their support for the law change. So this committee - which is not a select committee - cannot be expected to be impartial" said Leigh Cookson, a spokeswoman for the group. "What is worse is that for organisations like us, and for many other groups, unions and individuals, there is outright hostility from the politicians on this committee towards our political and economic views on APEC, the free market and trade and investment liberalisation. So we can be sure we will not get a fair hearing on the concerns which we have expressed about the way the 1996 SIS Amendment Act expanded the role of the SIS to protect New Zealand's international and economic wellbeing being used to spy on people who oppose this market economic agenda." "More and more people are viewing the SIS as the government's secret, unaccountable thought police." "How can we expect a man like Mike Moore, who has described us as "primitives" who if we had our way would plunge New Zealand and the region into chaos and depression, and "grumpy geriatric communists" who tuck our shirts into our underpants to take any kind of objective view on this issue? How can we expect Mrs Shipley to listen given her trumpeting of how APEC is supposed to be a "passport out of poverty" for us all at the recent APEC Leaders Summit?." "Labour are really gutless to be going along with this legislation. Swapping personal SIS stories from their past as they did in their caucus meeting yesterday is one thing. Standing up for the right of people to voice their dissent to APEC and on other issues is another. But they clearly lack the gumption to do this." "People need to remember that in 1996 a range of organisations and individuals warned of the implications of expanding SIS powers in submissions made on the new legislation that was being considered back then. We were told by both National and Labour that we were being naive and paranoid." "The reality is that the paranoia appears to rest fairly and squarely with the government and the naivete with Labour, who are about to jointly back legislation which has as its clear subtext the agenda to silence dissent in time for the APEC meetings next year" she said. Further comment: Leigh Cookson, GATT Watchdog, (03) 3662803 From gattwd at corso.ch.planet.gen.nz Wed Dec 16 12:40:34 1998 From: gattwd at corso.ch.planet.gen.nz (Gatt Watchdog) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 15:40:34 +1200 Subject: [asia-apec 978] NZ APEC and Spy Law Changes Message-ID: MEDIA RELEASE FOR IMMEDIATE USE 16 December 1998 SIS LAWS TO BE CHANGEDTO PROTECT ASIAN DICTATORS The introduction of legislation into the House today, that will give the SIS the legitimate right to break-in and enter the homes of NZ citizens is part of the state's preparations for the hosting of APEC here in 1999. "New Zealanders should be outraged that our democratic rights to lawful dissent are being curbed so that some of the world's leaders due to attend the APEC meeting in Auckland next September will not be inconvenienced or embarrassed by public demonstrations, " says Corso National Co-ordinator Suzanne Menzies-Culling. "There are many informed people in this region who are against free trade, and there is still grave concern in this country about the abuse of human rights, that takes place in this part of the world." "Many of the leaders coming to the APEC Summit next year have lamentable Human Rights record at home, and it is ironic that New Zealanders rights are being brought into line with theirs." Last year in Vancouver, crowd of students and community people were pepper sprayed, and anti-free trade activists were violently arrested and unlawfully detained during the APEC Conference. The Canadian government pulled out all the stops to ensure there was no debate or dissent about the free trade agenda that is causing such inequality and misery to the world's people. "I have no doubt that the NZ Government is seeking to ensure that the APEC leaders summit goes smoothly and that the SIS will be part of the machinery of the state that will be used to implement this, " said Ms Menzies-Culling. "In Canada several Indonesian agents were arrested, three of them at gunpoint during the conference, and the Canadians were outraged at what they saw on television. The scandal still haunts the Jean Chretien Government and has led to the resignation of two cabinet ministers. New Zealanders need to be informed and wary of any proposed changes to the law that will limit our democratic rights to protest and dissent," Ms Menzies-Culling concluded. Contact: Suzanne Menzies-Culling. Ph (03) 477 3395 daytime From gattwd at corso.ch.planet.gen.nz Wed Dec 16 15:23:38 1998 From: gattwd at corso.ch.planet.gen.nz (Gatt Watchdog) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 18:23:38 +1200 Subject: [asia-apec 979] NZ: APEC 99 and Spy Law Change Message-ID: <4LFL1e1w165w@corso.ch.planet.gen.nz> New Zealand Herald, Auckland Dec 16 1998 Page 1 Govt pushes spy bill to allow SIS to raid homes By John Armstrong Legislation giving SIS agents explicit power to break into private homes will be rushed through Parliament today. The move comes a day after the Privacy Commissioner, Bruce Slane, recommended the removal of some Security Intelligence Service privileges under the Privacy Act. The Government has support from Labour, meaning the bill's passage is assured, despite Alliance and Green MPs' grave reservations yesterday. Critics labelled the bill a "declaration of war on dissent" ahead of the Apec summit in Auckland. That meeting, next September, is one reason the measure is being pushed into Parliament by the Prime Minister under urgency. The "break-in" legislation was discussed at yesterday's meeting of the Labour caucus, where backing was not unanimous. But sources say most of the caucus accepted Government arguments that the SIS needed the power to enter private premises, given security concerns over the Apec visit of world leaders. The legislation follows last week's Court of Appeal ruling that an interception warrant does not give the SIS the right to enter a private home as it did when it raided the home of anti-free trade activist Aziz Choudry in July 1996, during an Apec trade ministers' meeting in Christchurch. Mr Choudry, who is suing the Crown for $300,000 for trespass and compensation for breach of the Bill of Rights, said last night that the bill was a declaration of war on dissent. Anti-Apec activists were steeling themselves to be targeted despite only planning lawful protest against global liberalisation policies. "It is all about wanting to present a nice sanitised view of New Zealand to the international media". Jenny Shipley - the minister responsible for the SIS - defended her amending bill, saying that until the Appeal Court's ruling it had been presumed that existing law allowed covert entry, as in Australia, Canada and Britain. "It is vital the SIS is able to carry out its functions properly in gathering intelligence on security threats. In some rare instances, this may require covert entry into private property." She refused to specify what threats might justify entry. Corso, the Alliance and the Green Party condemned the proposed law change as an infringement of rights and the Auckland Council for Civil Liberties said it appeared to be an attempt to legitimise past SIS activities. Meanwhile, Mr Slane is advocating the SIS must ensure data it gathers is for a lawful purpose and not be stored longer than necessary. Letters to the editor - letters@herald.co.nz From quonset at aloha.com Wed Dec 16 18:27:46 1998 From: quonset at aloha.com (Malia Robinson/Roger Furrer) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1998 23:27:46 -1000 Subject: [asia-apec 980] Re: NZ Declares war on dissent In-Reply-To: <0gwk1e1w165w@corso.ch.planet.gen.nz> Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.19981215232746.007cfae0@aloha.com> PRESS RELEASE For Immediate Release December 13, 1998 For further information contact Malama Makua through: Sparky Rodrigues, (808) 696-2823 or Roger Furrer, (808) 695-5317 Malama Makua and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) will tour Makua Military Reservation on Tuesday, December 15, 1998. The site visit will be followed by an informal meeting of community representatives, the EPA, the State Department of Health (DOH), and a senior military official. The site visit will begin at 9:00 am with the meeting scheduled to begin at 1:00 pm at the Makua Range headquarters conference room. The site visit is a follow-up to the September 30, 1998 meeting between the EPA, the DOH, and community representatives regarding the clean-up and closure at the Open-Burn, Open-Detonation (OBOD) site at Makua Military Reservation. At that time, the EPA proposed indefinitely delaying the closure of the OBOD site, contrary to the request of the US Army. The EPA recommendation also met with strong opposition from the Wai`anae Community, which called for the clean up of the valley and the closure of the military reservation at Makua. Malama Makua and the Earthjustice Legal Defense Fund are currently suing the US Army over their failure to complete an environmental impact statement covering their use of Makua valley, and for their failure to comply with the US Endangered Species Act. Makua is home to over 30 endangered plants and animals, many of which are known only to exist in that valley. Malama Makua is a community-based organization seeking to protect Makua valley, clean up almost 70 years of military debris, and to return it to civilian control. Release Update: 12/15/98 The meeting today went very well. Long. It ended up going from 9:00-4:00. EPA and the State of Hawai`i have agreed to pursue testing for contamination (primarily lead) in the muliwai (brackish ponds) on the state park property, outside of the military reservation. Initial discussions were also begun in securing a critcal analysis of the testing done by the Army back in 1994, upon which the EPA has based its analysis. Furthermore, both the EPA and the State Departmeent of Health have indicated that, based on the public input from the September 30, 1998 meeting, they are reconsidering their earlier position to delay clean-up of the Open-burn/Open-Detonation site. Most important of all, further discussions on the future of Makua will continue. Malama Makua has also been informed that the US Army has filed papers with the US Fish and Wildlife Service to begin the process of complying with the Endangered Species Act. Malama Makua takes this as a sign that the US Army is conceeding at least one half of our lawsuit. Mahalo, Roger Furrer From tpl at cheerful.com Thu Dec 17 09:40:06 1998 From: tpl at cheerful.com (BAYAN) Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 08:40:06 +0800 Subject: [asia-apec 981] International Human Rights Day in the Philippines Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.19981217084006.0069bfe8@pop.skyinet.net> >KARAPATAN >Alliance for the Advancement of People’s Rights >10 DECEMBER 1998 > >Rights Group rates Estrada administration’s >human rights record on International Human Rights Day > >In a rally at the historic Mendiola Bridge, dubbed as "December 10, a Day >of Celebration, Mourning and Struggle", the human rights alliance, >KARAPATAN, rated the human rights record of the Estrada administration. Marie Hilao-Enriquez, secretary-general of KARAPATAN, lamented >that, "Contrary to his promises that he will be the protector of the poor, >the record of the Estrada regime scored a 'perfect' score as the new >protector of the rights and interests of multinational corporations, >landlords, and big business." > >"Even as the international community celebrates the 50th Anniversary of the >Universal Declaration of Human Rights, four leaders and members of peasant >organizations have been killed in Leyte, Bohol and Toledo City, Cebu. One >of them, Roberto Kinney, was killed in Mandaluyong for leading peasant struggle >in San Rafael IV, Noveleta, Cavite against >land-grabbing by the Dalahican Agro-Marine Corporation and the >First Noveleta Realty and Development Corporation. Likewise, police and >military forces attacked communities in San Jose del Monte, >Bulacan, Mandaue City, Cebu, and Florida Blanca, Pampanga, to enforce >landlord and developer claims." > >"In Bohol, counter-insurgency operations were conducted to stifle the >resistance of peasant organizations against the Cebu-Inabanga Water Deal. >While in Capiz, military operations involving the 3rd Infantry Battalion, >PA are forcing peasants to give way to mining operations. From November >12-14 in Brgy. Puray, Rodriguez, Rizal, during operations conducted by the >6th and 9th Army Scout Rangers, the soldiers arrested Cresencio Cruz and >repeatedly hit him with rifle butts until he involuntarily defecated. Cruz >became lame as a result of the beatings." > >Enriquez added, "While these are occurring, 139 political prisoners >continue to languish in jail even after the government signed the >Comprehensive Agreement on Respect for Human Rights and International >Humanitarian Law with the National Democratic Front of the Philippines. The >Estrada administration is a disappointment. While Aquino and Ramos >released a substantial number of political prisoners upon assumption into >office, President Estrada has not yet done so." > >"And now, President Estrada’s coddling of the Marcos family and their >cronies has emboldened Imelda Marcos, the Iron Butterfly, to openly >claim the corporations which they acquired with Filipino tax payers’ money >during Martial Law. As we, the victims of the Marcos >dictatorship, watch as the circus unfolds with the infighting among >the Marcos family and their cronies, we cannot help but seethe with anger. >They are committing a double injustice to the victims of human rights >violations under Marcos. Instead of helping the Marcos victims with their >rightful claims, in fulfilment of its commitment to the Comprehensive >Agreement on HR & IHL with the National Democratic Front, >the Estrada regime facilitated the dismissal of 27 graft charges against >the Marcos family." > >Enriquez averred, "We are in black today because KARAPATAN together with >people's organizations under BAYAN are in mourning this December 10. >Exactly one hundred years ago, Spain and America signed the Treaty of >Paris. In said treaty, the Philippines was annexed by the United >States of America as its colony. And since then, even with the changes in >the seat of power, all succeeding regimes only served to pursue the >interests of US imperialism and its local allies. >And the record of the Estrada administration during the last five months is essentially no different. The only variation is in the style. Cory Aquino feigned innocence. Fidel Ramos mastered dissembling. And Estrada is wont to play the tough guy film actor. Thus, it is not surprising that the >Estrada administration is currently pushing for charter change and the >National ID system, tasks which were left unfinished by the Ramos >administration." > >Enriquez added, "If there is anything to learn from the history of the >framing of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the continuing >subjugation of the country to US imperialism which started with the Treaty >of Paris, and the Estrada regime’s record on human rights, is that >people’s rights can only be attained through ceaseless struggle."# > > --------------------------------------------------------- > B A Y A N > Bagong Alyansang Makabayan or New Patriotic Alliance > No. 23 Maamo Street, Sikatuna Village > Quezon City, PHILIPPINES > Telephone: (63-2) 435-9151 Telefax: (63-2) 922-5211 > Email: > Bayan webpage URL: > http://www.bigfoot.com/~bayan-phils > ----------------------------------------------------------- > From tpl at cheerful.com Thu Dec 17 09:58:27 1998 From: tpl at cheerful.com (BAYAN) Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 08:58:27 +0800 Subject: [asia-apec 982] Gerson on US-Japan Alliance Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.19981217085827.006b321c@pop.skyinet.net> NOTE: This is the paper that Dr. Joseph Gerson would have presented in the Roundtable Discussion on the U.S.-Japan Militarist Adenda in the Asia-Pacific which was sponsored by BAYAN and the Japan-based Asia-Wide Campaign (AWC). >Redefined U.S.-Japanese Hegemonic Alliance >Dr. Joseph Gerson > >Friends, > Our related struggles for economic security based on economic justice - not globalization - and for peace based on human - not elite - security are the >fundamental challenges of our times. I am therefore sorry that previous >commitments prevent me from joining you in this counter-APEC conference >against economic globalization. I share the following pages which summarize >U.S.-Japanese efforts to consolidate their regional hegemony in the coming >decades as my small contribution to your work. > In the Asia-Pacific region, the U.S. seeks to simultaneously contain and >engage China, to contain its ally and rival Japan, and to dominate the sea >lanes and straits through which the region's trade and supplies of oil must >travel (the "jugular vein" of Asia Pacific economies.) Toward this end the >United States is playing Japan and China against one another by means of the >redefinition of the U.S.-Japan alliance and the creation of a U.S.-Chinese >"strategic partnership." > During the Clinton years, the U.S.-Japan alliance has been transformed >through the Nye Initiative, the "U.S.-Japan Alliance for the 21st Century" >and the more recent "revision" of the U.S.-Japan Guidelines for Joint >Military Operations. > The alliance "redefinition" has gone essentially unreported and undebated in the U.S. Although debate in Tokyo has been largely contained by the LDP Government, some in the Japanese establishment as well as in the political opposition have been deeply concerned. A senior LDP Diet member warned of possible regression to "the days of the Imperial Rule Assistance >Association."(1) Asahi Shimbun editorialized that like the 1960 treaty >revision, the "redefinition" of the alliance has undermined Japanese >democratic structures and values. U.S. and Japanese officials " Asahi >Shinbum editorialized, "have circumvented the public and legislative debate >necessary to formally amend the treaty. The alliance [has been] reworked >into a mechanism to deploy U.S. military resources from Japan into a vast, >ill-defined 'Asia-Pacific' region and to provide Japanese support for such >deployment.... The Japan-U.S. Security Treaty has, for all intents and >purposes been rewritten." (2) > The "Review" of the Defense Guidelines, completed in September 1997, is at its core a commitment to joint military operations in crises posing "a >security threat to Japan." Such threats could include turmoil on the Korean >peninsula, or military confrontations over Taiwan, South China Sea, the >Malacca Strait and the Middle East. In response to numerous Chinese protests >that the alliance's new scope of operations includes its "renegade" province >Taiwan, Japanese officials and now its Defense White Paper respond that the >framework is "conceptual" and "non geographic." > The revised guidelines outline joint US-Japanese military cooperation >during "normal" circumstances, to counter an armed attack against Japan, and >in response to the so-called "situations in areas surrounding Japan." The >report lists 40 examples of such cooperation including elements of the new >ACSA agreement, provision of US military access to all SDF facilities and to >all civilian ports and airports (even those such as Kobe whose local >governments have declared their communities nuclear-free), intelligence >sharing, and Japanese minesweeping operations in Japanese territorial waters. > The Japanese Left and constitutional scholars have protested arguing that the Treaty revision breaks dangerous new ground by attempting to legitimate Japan as a regional military power with global reach. Under the guise of a "concept" that is "non geographic but situational" they warn that Japan is assuming military responsibility for "situations" far beyond its shores. > Should the North Korean government collapse or China respond militarily to a Taiwanese declaration of independence, we will likely witness the Japanese >military, serving at the United States' junior partner, returning to its >former colonies. "Situations" that will have an important influence on >Japan's peace and security could also include disturbances in the secure >flow of Indonesian and Persian Gulf oil essential for the Japanese and other >East Asian economies. While the Left increasingly refers to the Guidelines >revison as a "war alliance", Asahi Shimbun reports that "the new Japan-US >guidelines...represent Japan's commitment to involve itself more deeply in >Washington's military strategy for the Asia Pacific region."(4) > Even before the Japanese Diet has passed the enabling legislation, many of the Review's unconstitutional recommendations are being implemented. U.S. >spokesmen will admit to "lower level military-to-military planning" as >provided for in the Review, but U.S. warships have also called at almost >every Japanese port during the past year. The number of Japanese civilian >airports used by US military aircraft has increased and, as mentioned >earlier, Japan is participating in this summer's RIMPAC "collective >security" war games.(5) > Several other aspects of "The Review" should be noted. It reaffirms the >U.S. commitment to defend Japan with nuclear weapons. On one hand, this >seeks to provide "legitimacy" for U.S. forward deployment of the weapons and >infrastructure essential to U.S. first strike nuclear threats. Less well >understood is the second purpose of this provision. By placing Japan under >and within the U.S. nuclear umbrella, Washington is staunching pressures >which have increased with the Indian and Pakistani demonstration nuclear >explosions, for Japan to become a nuclear weapons state, a nuclear armed >Japan would functionally challenge U.S. regional dominance. > What about Japan's "peace' constitution? Although popular support for the constitution continues to restrain Japanese militarism, the Review nearly >completes more than forty years of U.S. and LDP efforts to circumvent >Article 9 in which the Japanese people "forever renounce war as a sovereign >right of the nation and the threat or use of force as a means of settling >international disputes." The Japanese government is thus increasingly >unconstitutional. > So advanced is this process that while some in the LDP's leadership urge >more aggressive nonproliferation diplomacy in the wake of the Indian and >Pakistani demonstration nuclear "tests", others have gone beyond traditional >Japan Defense Agency statements that the Constitution permits Japan to >possess tactical nuclear weapons. Cabinet Legislative Bureau director >general, Masasuke Omori, informed the Diet on June 17 that Article 9 of the >Japanese constitution makes the "use of nuclear weapons by Japan a >hypothetical possibility as long as it was the minimum necessary for >defending Japan." (6) > > >1. "Struck off the record" Asahi Shimbun, April 16, 1997 >2. "Constitutional scholars oppose Japan-U.S. guidelines" Asahi Shimbun, >November 3, 1997 >3. "The Guidelines for U.S.-Japan Defense Cooperation" Washington, D.C.: >Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Public Affairs), September 23, >1997; "Summary of Japan-U.S.-defense guidelines, Asahi Evening News, Tokyo >September 24, 1997; Guidelines to cover Taiwan/Govt to define defense >cooperation's geographical scope, The Daily Yomiuri, April 27, 1998. >4. Asahi Shimbun, Op. Cit. >5. "U.S. military more active", Ashi Shimbun, April 6, 1998. >Japan Press Service, Tokyo, June 22, 1998. > From jkellock at amnesty.org Fri Dec 18 21:05:14 1998 From: jkellock at amnesty.org (jkellock@amnesty.org) Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 12:05:14 +0000 Subject: [asia-apec 983] Amnesty International - Iraq Message-ID: <802566DE.00429554.00@fox.amnesty.org> News Service: 249/98 AI INDEX: MDE 14/07/98 17 DECEMBER 1998 Amnesty International says governments must protect civilian life Amnesty International is gravely concerned at the potential indiscriminate killings of civilians in Iraq, in the context of the present military operations by the US and UK forces. According to reports, around 30 people were killed and 100 others wounded, some seriously, during the attack on Baghdad which started on Wednesday at 2200 GMT. Last night 10 missiles are reported to have fallen on residential areas of the city, destroying a number of houses. Iran said that a US missile struck the city of Khoramshahr, near the border with Iraq, early on Thursday. No casualties were reported. In June 1997, a US General Accounting Office report entitled ?Operation Desert Storm - evaluation of the air campaign? stated that ?many of the Department of Defence?s and Manufacturers? postwar claims about weapon system performance - particularly the F117, Tomahawk land attack missile and laser guided bombs -- were overstated, misleading, inconsistent with the best available data, or unverifiable.? ?The experience of previous armed interventions in the Gulf has shown that, all too often, civilians become the acceptable casualties of war?, Amnesty International said, adding that on 16 December the organization warned that ?imminent military attacks by US and UK forces could lead to indiscriminate or disproportionate killings of civilians?. Noting reports that a wheat storage house in Tekrit, north of Baghdad, is said to have been burnt by missiles, the human rights organization has reminded the US and UK governements of the general prohibition in international humanitarian law to attack objects indispensable to the survival of the civilian population. Amnesty International is also concerned about the closure by Jordan, Syria and Turkey of their border with Iraq which would prevent people fleeing the attacks from seeking safety in these countries. Amnesty International calls on all neighbouring countries to guarantee the right to protection in another country for refugees fleeing when their life, safety and security are at risk. The human rights organization reiterates that the international community has an obligation to provide all necessary assistance to ensure that the responsibility of dealing with refugees is shared by all states and does not fall disproportionately on those geographically close to Iraq. ENDS.../ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------- News Service:247/98 AI INDEX: MDE 14/06/98 16 December 1998. Amnesty International appeals to the US and UK governments over fear of indiscriminate killings of civilians in Iraq Amnesty International launched today urgent worldwide appeals to the US and UK governments reminding them that life, safety and security of civilians must be paramount in any action taken to resolve the new crisis over Iraq. ?Imminent military attacks by US and UK forces could lead to indiscriminate or disproportionate killings of civilians. The experience of previous armed intervention in the Gulf has shown that, all too often, civilians become the acceptable casualties of war. All governments have an obligation to respect and protect civilian life?, Amnesty International said. In November 1998, Amnesty International wrote to the US and UK governments urging that life, safety and security of civilians must be the paramount consideration in any action taken to resolve conflicts and to insure the protection of civilians in accordance with international humanitarian law. Amnesty International also wrote to the Iraqi government and urged that all necessary measures be taken to protect the civilian population in Iraq. During the Gulf War in 1991 thousands of civilians in Iraq were killed in aerial bombardment of Baghdad and other cities by US and allied forces. In one such incident, more than 300 civilians were killed in the ?Amariya air raid shelter in Baghdad. Amnesty International?s fear of imminent attacks comes in the light of the report by the head of the UN Special Commission (UNSCOM) to the UN Security Council on 15 December about Iraq?s reported lack of full cooperation with UN weapons inspectors and the sudden evacuation from Iraq of UN staff, including UN humanitarian workers. Last month, US and UK forces narrowly aborted a military attack against Iraq after it had announced on 14 November that it would resume full cooperation with UN weapons inspectors. However, both the US and UK governments have since repeatedly indicated that military action against Iraq will be taken immediately, without a UN Security Council resolution, should it fail to cooperate with UN weapons inspectors in the future. The threat of military attacks against Iraq came after its decision on 31 October to end all cooperation with UN weapons inspectors. Amnesty International?s fears for the safety of the civilian population in Iraq have been heightened by reports which appeared in November in the US press. On 16 November 1998 the US newspaper, the Washington Post, reported that President Clinton had been warned by the Pentagon that the initial attack plan would result in by far the most deadly military undertaking of his presidency, possibly killing 10,000 Iraqis. On 17 November 1998, another US newspaper, the New York Times, wrote: "Aides to Mr. Clinton said that in making his decision, he was troubled by Pentagon estimates that several thousand Iraqis, including civilians, would be killed in the air strikes, a death toll far greater than any other American military strike since the Persian Gulf war in 1991.? Amnesty International has so far received no confirmation from US officials as to the accuracy of these newspaper reports. On 13 November the organization publicly expressed concern that civilians might be indiscriminately killed in the event of a military action against Iraq. ENDS.../ From davidweb at interchange.ubc.ca Sat Dec 19 05:20:21 1998 From: davidweb at interchange.ubc.ca (David Webster) Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 12:20:21 -0800 Subject: [asia-apec 984] Van Sun: APEC-PCC commission extinct Message-ID: Vancouver Sun Last updated: Friday 18 December 1998 NATIONAL NEWS --------------------------------------------------------- Last two commissioners quit APEC panel ------------------------------------------------------- IAN BAILEY VANCOUVER (CP) - The last two members of a panel probing RCMP conduct at last year's APEC summit have quit, providing a clean slate for efforts to restart the troubled hearings. The head of the RCMP Public Complaints Commission said Thursday she will announce soon how the troubled probe will proceed. "I have a responsibility to ensure that complaints brought before the commission are examined in a way that is balanced and fair," said Shirley Heafey. "I intend to fulfil this mandate." A spokesman for the commission said a further announcement may be made before Christmas. Heafey was reacting to the departures of Vina Starr and John Wright. Their resignations followed the departure of Gerald Morin, the panel's chairman who quit after being accused of biased. He also accused Heafey of interfering in the commission's work. In a joint letter, Starr and Wright said they resigned to strip any concern about bias from the panel. The two said all the allegations had a "cumulative negative effect" on the panel's work. George Macintosh, lawyer for 39 Mounties facing public complaints, said the resignations are for the best. "They were burdened by being participants in a panel which has been under a cloud." The embattled commission - an independent agency that probes complaints against the RCMP - has heard scores of matters in its 10 years, but none like the complaints filed following the APEC summit. The commission is supposed to assess the manner in which RCMP security forces treated mostly student protesters during clashes at the 1997 summit. Scores of activists were detained and pepper-sprayed during clashes with security forces. Some female protesters were strip-searched. The federal Liberal government - notably Prime Minister Jean Chretien (PC) - have defended Heafey's process in the face of opposition demands for a judicial inquiry. Those demands were renewed Thursday. In Vancouver, Reform Leader Preston Manning angrily described the APEC process as an ongoing soap opera. Manning said Heafey's commission lacks the ability to deal with suggestions that Chretien's office intervened in security arrangements to protect visiting leaders from embarrassing protest. "I don't really think (the commission) has the jurisdiction to get to the top of the matter," Manning said. But federal Solicitor General Lawrence MacAuley rejected the idea, defending the commission's work as appropriate. "There is a process in place," he said Thursday. "It's an independent process - arm's length that's set up to handle (matters) such as this. "Let it do its work and it will." Chretien said the next move is up to Heafey, an Ottawa lawyer. "Now the members of the board have resigned, and that is the problem of the president of the commission to decide who will take over, not me," Chretien said in Ottawa. Lawyers involved in the inquiry said Thursday they will wait to see what Heafey does next. Most said they would not be opposed to Heafey appointing a whole new panel and re-launching the hearings. "If the (commission) can put in place a hearing process that we feel we can have confidence in, and if the matter is done on an expedited basis, I expect that would be acceptable," said James Williams, lawyer for two Mounties. Macintosh said he would not be opposed to a new start provided he is permitted to review all the letters Heafey sent to the now-dismantled panel to ensure she has not pre-judged the hearing. Macintosh also said he hopes Heafey will appoint a panel chairman with judicial experience. Cameron Ward, lawyer for more than two dozen protesters, said he would like to see a judicial inquiry. He said he wants the federal government to reconsider its decision to deny legal funding for the student protesters. Ward also wants a commitment from Chretien that he will testify. "If there is to be a hearing, I would hope they would get it right this time around." _ _ _ \ / "Long words Bother me." \ / -- Winnie the Pooh From hanboss at nownuri.net Mon Dec 21 00:17:42 1998 From: hanboss at nownuri.net (ÇÑÀºÁ¤) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 00:17:42 +0900 (KST) Subject: [asia-apec 985] From Korea Message-ID: <199812201517.AAA09056@tiger1.nownuri.net> PSSP Announcement 20, December, 1998 Who Is the Real Terrorist? United States Itself - Militaristic Attack on Iraq Is an Attack on the Peace in the Middle East - Today(6:59 am. Dec. 17, Korean Time), US launched military attack on Iraq second times. US announced that it would continued the attack till Iraq accept unconditioned and unlimited inspection on Iraqi weapons. The attack was started just after Richard Butler, chief inspector of United Nations Special Committee on Iraq (UNSCOM), warned Iraq's noncooperation and prevention to its inspection on weapons of mass destruction. UN Security Council (UNSC) was heard about the attack while discussing the report by Butler on Iraq's noncooperation and stopped the discussion. Following France and Russia, China made an announcement saying concern over UNSCOM's decision and report of withdrawing the inspection team. They also expressed clear opposition to the unilateral attack led by US and Britain, saying 'use of military power would not only cause serious result on implementation of the resolution of UNSC but also threatens world peace and security of the region'. We argue that the attack was done unilaterally by US and Britain alone without any agreement process in UNSC. UNSC expressed earlier its oppositional position strongly to use of military power on Iraq. We have to point out that the attack was based on ugly intention which try to divert public attention from Clinton's impeachment issue. This reminds us of Gulf War in 1991 and bombing on Iraq in June 1993 which were based on arbitrary information of 'Iraq government's plan of assasination of president Bush'. Meanwhile, US Conservative Party announced its suprapartisan support to the attack, saying 'US's attack must have continuous and effective stroke enough to break down Hussein government and destroy all the major military facilities in Iraq'. We send our strong warn and protest to the reactionary and imperialistic attitude of US seen by this speech and the attack. We also have to point out that the attack was based on the interest of US based oil monopoly capital which want to dominate oil resources in the Middle East. Unlike pro-US countries like Kuwait and Saudi Arabia, Iraqi Baht Party, in 1958, nationalized oil companies of Western monopoly capital for the basis of resource nationalism. US wants to have whole control over oil resources in the Middle East. It was and is based on this intention of monopoly and control over the oil resources that US collapsed Mosad government which was elected democratically and supported Palebi dynasty; that US supported Iraq militarily against Homaini's Iranian Revolution; that US continues its military and economic pressure on Iraq that goes along the way of independent nationalism with nationalized oil resources. We denounce this greed of US monopoly capital and the US government's military offence that threatens lives of all the Third World people for the interest of its monopoly capital. We cannot but to think that 'US, as the only hegemonic state after the collapse of the real existing socialist countries, has the policy of maintaining and expanding its political, economic, and military influence through endless local warfares'. This can be confirmed by US' attempt for military attack on North Korea around nuclear inspection as well as bombing on Iraq. We warn US to abandon the whole attempts, for the fate of Third World people can be at the beck and call of US' military action. 1. US' military attack on Iraq is not based on UNSC, but on imperialistic provocation by US and Britain ignoring former agreement in UN. US and British governments argue that according to the agreement they have authority, if necessary, of military attack, but this is a total lie. US has shown thorough attitude of ignoring UN resolutions if they are against the interest of US. US has always been a prototype of imperialism that follows logic of power, not that of agreement and peace. This is not US of the past, but US of the present. 2. After up to 9,000 times weapon inspections and total destruction of military facilities, threatening of Iraqi military power has been extinct indeed. Rather, 1.6 millions of Iraqi people have died because of US economic sanction, and at present the economy and people's life of Iraq is in worst situation. The conflict between UN inspection team and Iraqi government around the issue of access to Iraqi ruling party's building is due to the imperialistic attitude that would not admit the least national sovereignty of Iraq. One more military attack, despite of economic sanction for over 8 years and thousands times weapon inspections, is the real 'terrorism' on the Third World people by imperialst countries. 3. Peace in the Middle East is being threatened by US which seeks military hegemony. We argue that peace is achieved not by military action but by peaceful means. In this point, US is not a mediator of peace but a war maker. We reveal that US is major criminal who destroys the Middle East peace, and we argue that US must stop all the military actions and pressures immediately. In our opinion, all the imperialistic military actions should be stopped by international solidarity of working people around the world. December 17, 1998 People's Solidarity for Social Progress (PSSP) From alarm at HK.Super.NET Thu Dec 24 05:49:02 1998 From: alarm at HK.Super.NET (ALARM (APEC Labour Rights Monitor)) Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 12:49:02 -0800 Subject: [asia-apec 986] Search for a Research Coordinator Message-ID: <199812230450.MAA13001@kwaifong.hk.super.net> Dear friends. We would appreciate it very much if you could pass this information to someone who might be interested. ------------- We are re-opening our search for a full time Research Coordinator post in the field of Asian labour and development . Asia Monitor Resource Center is a regional non-governmental organisation focusing in labour issues in Asia. Research Coordinator: Requires an individual experienced in planning and coordinating participatory research projects and committed to supporting labour groups around the region. Responsibilities include: planning and budgeting research projects, liaising with project partners, organising training workshops, overseeing implementation of AMRC's projects and writing research projects. Requirements: Experience in working in a trade union, non-governmental organisation or with Asian labour and/or development issues, strong English communication and writing skills, experience in planning and implementing research proejcts and a strong foundation in labour related issues. One Asian language preferred. Interested parties should send a cover letter and resume postmarked by January 15, 1999 to: Apo Leung, Director, Asia Monitor Resource Center, 444 Nathan Road, 8-B, Kowloon, Hong Kong. (Fax: +852 2385-5319; Tel: +852 2332-1346; E-mail: amrc@hk.super.net or alarm@hk.super.net ------------------------------------------ ALARM Project, c/o AMRC 444 Nathan Road, 8-B Kowloon, Hong Kong T# +852 2332-1346 F# +852 2385-5319 ------------------------------------------- ALARM Project, c/o AMRC 444 Nathan Road, 8-B Kowloon, Hong Kong T# +852 2332-1346 F# +852 2385-5319