From panap at panap.po.my Sun Nov 1 17:15:55 1998 From: panap at panap.po.my (PAN Asia Pacific) Date: Sun, 01 Nov 1998 17:15:55 Subject: [asia-apec 839] Ruggiero pied by P.I.E (People Insurgent Everywhere) Message-ID: <3019@panap.po.my> (This Message comes from Peoples' Global Action) Dear PGA'ers, Thought you'd like to know that some of your friends in London had a meeting with Renato Ruggiero, Director-General of the WTO. In a well-planned operation, as Ruggiero left The Royal Institute of International Affairs (RIIA) in London after his keynote speech on the second day of conference entitled 'Trade, Investment and the Environment', he was met by three representatives from 'People Insurgent Everywhere (P.I.E.). Each of the three came carrying a large lemon pie, with extra cream...While one engages in small-talk, from the left appears a perfectly aimed pie - right on Ruggiero's left cheek. A second draws a direct hit. 'That's a present from the dispossessed!' shouts one of the P.I.E'ers. 'We are everywhere!' comes another call, before the three pie throwers make off into London's West End crowds, leaving Ruggiero to lick his wounds and mourn his dignity. This is all captured by video-camera, photojournalists and the print media. With his head white with cream and bits of pastry stuck to him, he runs inside. Chased by the video-camera operator. The final shot is of Ruggiero slamming the bathroom door into the face of the brave video person. NB. The conference centred on the coexistence of free-trade and environmental sustainability. It was aimed at NGO's. It only cost them US$700 for 2 days.! NB2. This action formed a holy trinity of powerful men feeling the force of the pie. Right-wing economist Milton Friedman got the treatment in San Francisco, then Monsanto's big chief Bob Shapiro got it in the face this week. Maybe there's an outbreak underway.... Below is a more in-depth account of the day --------------------- VIVE LES ENTARTEURS! or THE PIE'S THE LIMIT! In a nutshell: World Trade Organisation Director-General Renato 'Rocky' Ruggiero gets lemon pied at London conference on 'Trade, Investment and the Environment' by representatives of the Biotic Baking Brigade, (a.k.a People Insurgent Everywhere, or P.I.E). They cite his ceaseless services to global exploitation and destruction. The Build-Up: The Royal Institute of International Affairs (RIIA), a.k.a Chatham House, is nestled in a discreet, leafy square in the heart of London's West End, normally the haunt of sleek shoppers and secretaries-of-state whose purring Mercs await their masters obediently. On Friday October 30th it played host to a bewildering gathering, for this was the second day of a conference entitled 'Trade, Investment and the Environment', organised by RIIA, 'supported' by the Guardian newspaper, and sponsored by the following (...take a deep breath): Imperial Chemical Industries plc (ICI), the Department for International Development (DFID), the Worldwide Fund for Nature (WWF), the International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development (ICTSD) and the Department of Trade and Industry (DTI; home of our reptilian friend Mr. Peter Mandelson). And the price of this unmissable 2 day event? £881.25 for corporates, and a once-in-a-lifetime not-to-be-missed knockdown bargain basement £440.63 for NGO's. The keynote speaker to this array of the great and the perhaps not so good was none other than Renato 'Rocky' Ruggiero, a one-man charisma bypass as well as outgoing Director-General of the World Trade Organisation. Rocky is probably one of the most powerful, if little known, men on the face of the planet, since as the WTO's first boss he has, to paraphrase his own words, rewritten the rules of the global economy. Those rules now defend the principles of 'free trade' above those of working conditions, wages and environmental protection: the WTO is the temple where the mantra of the markets (ie. profit) is worshipped, and Rocky is its High Priest. Now Rocky knows that a fairly effective green/social justice coalition temporarily knackered the MAI, (it may now be inveigled through the WTO); he also knows that these concerns are a huge hindrance to the continued imperial progress of his organisation. So, he reasons, if I can co-opt middle of the road NGO's into a phoney committee that makes them feel like they're getting somewhere, I will have drawn their sting and driven a handy wedge between them and more grassrootsy resistance such as that of groups acting as People's Global Action (PGA). (PGA, for those of you who aren't aware, came into being in February this year to counter the creeping poison of the WTO, 'free trade' and corporate rule. PGA actions around the G8/WTO meetings in May this year were massive and widespread, and included the overturning of what was widely thought to be our Rocky's very own Merc during the Geneva leg of the Global Street Party.) This wedge was also Nestle boss Helmut Maucher's divide-and-rule tactic at the recent Geneva Business Dialogue, when he drew a line between 'responsible' NGO's with paid-up members and transparent accounts, and unnamed, unacountable 'activist pressure groups', PGA obviously being uppermost in his obsessively suspicious corporate head. The Action: Anyway, digressions aside, the Chatham House conference was obviously a perfect opportunity for Rocky to further his plan of spoonfeeding greenwash to NGO's by giving them a baby chair at the table of power. Little did he know that as he waxed lyrical on the joys of sustainable economic growth and the gorgeous new world he envisioned of the world as one huge trade superhighway...little did he know that outside waited trained representatives of the UK arm of the Biotic Baking Brigade, a.k.a. People Insurgent Everywhere - P.I.E. for the acronymically challenged - each armed with an exquisite lemon pie enhanced with the tackiest most wastefully packaged product known to man: whipped cream in an aerosol. So, after a hard morning's work schmoozing with reps from UK groups with £440.63 to burn, as well as delivering a 20 minute keynote address, the bald-pated, bespectacled, well-rounded Rocky emerged from the hallowed portals of Chatham House. Our fearless band of entarteurs (to use the original Belgian term made famous by Bill Gates-pier Noel Godin) approached him, one hailing him before he could step off the kerb to reach his chauffeur-driven motor. 'Mr. Ruggiero?' said the pie-handler, feeling desperately for his pie. 'Yes?' said Rocky, his minder stepping between charge and assailant, the latter still fumbling in a plastic bag for ammunition. Suddenly out of left field comes a perfectly-aimed pie, striking Rocky on the left cheek. Again out of nowwhere a second pie scores a second direct hit. Rocky goes down, shielding himself with a sheaf of documents from the glare of cameras and the eyes of conference delegates sucking at ciggies on the pavement. 'Oh my gaad!' shrieks an unidentified American accent, possibly referring to the nightmare that is the North American Free Trade Agreement. 'That's a present from the dispossessed!' shouts one exultant assailant. Another achieves full coverage by spreading thick, sickly cream all over Rocky's sweaty head. As he cowers, one shouts 'And that's from the turtles!', reminding him of the recent landmark WTO decision refusing the US permission to boycott turtle-unfriendly shrimp. Then a quip of 'Are you bananas Mr Ruggiero?', questioning the curious logic that promotes free trade while proactively screwing Caribbean banana growers, rubs it in even further. 'We are everywhere!' comes another call, before the adrenalised entarteurs make off into the West End crowds, leaving Rocky to lick his wounds and mourn his dignity. Rocky slithers back into Chatham house, with videographer in hot pursuit, the final shot being of the bathroom door slamming in the intrepid cameraman's face. Temper, temper, Rocky. The Epilogue: Reports are not yet in of the atmosphere in the Conference for the rest of the day. Who can say whether the discussion on 'How can trade and investment liberalisation and environmental sustainability be reconciled?' saw sense and decided that "They can't; actually it's all just a plot by corporations and their economic police force the WTO/World Bank/IMF to spout a little retractable greenwash, forge a pragmatic alliance with institutionalised NGO's and carry on pillaging as normal." Who can say? It would be presumptuous to tar every delegate with the same brush, but certainly until we unite in the belief that the Rocky's WTO et al are unreformable, we will never get within pieing distance of the promised land... The fearsome threesome appear to have escaped to fling and fight another day. The pieing of Ruggiero completes an unholy trinity of recipients over the past month: first archfiend economist Milton Friedman gets the treatment in San Francisco, then Monsatan CEO Bob Shapiro orders a full facial (also in SF), and now Rocky Ruggiero goes down for the count on the steps of Chatham House. Could this be the start of a global epidemic of entartement? After all, we are all entarteurs... '''''''''''''''''' The Rhymin' Piemen '''''''''''''''''' #########@@@@@@@@@@@{{{{{{{{{{+++++++++++++++++******************* For instant relief, take T£R£A£N£S£N£A£T£I£O£N£A£L R$E$S$I$S$T$A$N$C$E on JUNE 18th 1999: INTERNATIONAL DAY OF ACTION AIMED AT THE HEART OF THE GLOBAL ECONOMY *Subscribe to J18discussion@gn.apc.org for dialogue and info-share* & Go here today: http://www.gn.apc.org/rts/ 88888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888 From gattwd at corso.ch.planet.gen.nz Mon Nov 2 10:16:43 1998 From: gattwd at corso.ch.planet.gen.nz (Gatt Watchdog) Date: Mon, 02 Nov 1998 13:16:43 +1200 Subject: [asia-apec 840] GATT Watchdog on Moore WTO bid Message-ID: GATT Watchdog PO Box 1905 Christchurch Aotearoa/New Zealand MEDIA RELEASE FOR IMMEDIATE USE 1 November 1998 Moore WTO Bid: Where do we send the money? asks fair trade group GATT Watchdog believes that the New Zealand Government has inadvertently launched a powerful weapon against the World Trade Organisation by backing former Prime Minister Mike Moore for the Director General's position. The fair trade coalition, which has been at the forefront of campaigns against the MAI, APEC and the GATT/WTO, is throwing its support behind Mr Moore's candidacy and promises a whip round among its committee this week after learning that Mr Moore's WTO campaign will cost over $500,000. "Already gambling people in our networks are taking bets as to how long it will take for Mike Moore to discredit and destroy the WTO if he gets the nod. Should he succeed in his bid it could be the kiss of death for the WTO," said a GATT Watchdog spokesperson, Aziz Choudry. "The credibility and agenda of the WTO has already been challenged by many peoples' movements worldwide. The kind of deregulated, market driven development which the WTO promotes is leading to even greater divisions between rich and poor in all countries as local communities and nations lose genuine control over their futures, and as economic and political power is transferred to unaccountable multilateral institutions." "We believe that in backing Mr Moore, the Shipley minority government has inadvertently unleashed a secret, devastating weapon against the WTO, the likes of which the world has probably never seen. We will urge our national and international networks to back Mr Moore's bid as part of our strategy to delegitimise the WTO and push for a just international trade regime which is not merely a set of rights and freedoms for global capital and the transnational corporations which dominate the world economy." Mr Moore has, in his eagerness to avoid substantiating his arguments in favour of trade and investment liberalisation, described New Zealand critics of APEC, the GATT/WTO and the MAI as "grumpy geriatric communists", "a mutant strain of the Left... who tuck their shirts into their underpants" and "primitives who, if they had their way, would throw New Zealand and our region into chaos and depression". "When his capacity for never stopping the facts from getting in the way of a chance to rave maniacally about the supposed wonders of free trade and investment becomes more widely known, we feel sure that his competitors will concede defeat. This would surely be an important prerequisite for the WTO top job." "But in the meantime, where do we send the money towards his campaign costs?" For further details contact Aziz Choudry, GATT Watchdog, ph (03) 3662803 From gattwd at corso.ch.planet.gen.nz Wed Nov 4 08:14:29 1998 From: gattwd at corso.ch.planet.gen.nz (Gatt Watchdog) Date: Wed, 04 Nov 1998 11:14:29 +1200 Subject: [asia-apec 841] Democracy Street - APEC 97: Inquiry Call Message-ID: Date: Tue, 3 Nov 1998 00:39:19 -0800 From: "S.I.S.I.S." Subject: Democracy Street: Apec Protestors call for Public Inquiries DEMOCRACY STREET DEMANDS PUBLIC INQUIRIES NOW :-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:Forwarded message:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-: Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 23:53:34 -0800 From: Garth Mullins Subject: Re: letter of support To: Prime Minister Jean Chretien ("Canada"), Premier Glen Clark ("British Columbia"), & Premier Mike Harris ("Ontario") Re: Demand for a Public Inquiry into events at Gustafsen Lake and Ipperwash. Democracy Street represents many protesters who were subjected to police violence and political interference from the Prime Minister's Office while voicing opposition to the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation Forum in November, 1997. While the state's actions during APEC (and later attempts to obstruct a fair hearing) represent a serious breach of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and a denial of basic democratic principles; we recognise that the events at Gustafsen Lake and Ipperwash were far more severe and aggressive assaults that, like the APEC demonstration, demand a full and public inquiry. Pepperspray, strip-searches, police dogs, brief detentions, and simple assaults are nothing compared to the intense violence used by the police in those cases and the ongoing violation of basic civil and political rights of Indigenous peoples. Gustafsen Lake was the largest para-military action in Canadian history and a heinous abuse of force as 77,000 rounds, including hollow point bullets, were fired into a small group of traditional Sundancers occupying unceded Shuswap territory. Armored personnel carriers and land mines were deployed. This police action also violated several international conventions on the use of force, including the Geneva Convention of 1951, of which the Canadian government is a signatory. The unanswered police murder of peaceful native protester, Dudley George at Ipperwash is a crime which further exposes the uneven application of justice in this country. Additionally, the government's misuse of power has been followed up by an intentional campaign to prevent the public from learning the truth about these incidents and to smear those involved. The PR campaign during the siege of Gustafsen Lake was lead by RCMP Sgt. Montague who was noted at the time to have said "smear campaigns are our specialty." Montague was also the head of security for the Indonesian delegation at APEC. The continual denial of a public inquiry discredits the government and damages the principles of democracy. We believe that Indigenous peoples and the public-at-large deserve a fair inquiry into these events and we demand that the politicians responsible be held to account for bringing violence upon the people at Gustafsen Lake and Ipperwash and denying their basic civil rights. We support Indigenous peoples' rights to self-determination and stand with them in their struggle against police violence and political interference. Finally, we urge the Prime Minister and Premiers Clark and Harris to publicly respond to these issues immediately with independent public inquiries. Democracy Street :-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:End forwarded message:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-: NO TO THE CANADIAN POLICE STATE IN SERVICE OF APEC, COLONIALISM & GENOCIDE Prime Minister of Canada, Jean Chretien mailto:remote-printer.Jean_Chretien@16139416900.iddd.tpc.int mailto:pm@pm.gc.ca BC Premier Glen Clark mailto:premier@gov.bc.ca Ontario Premier Mike Harris mailto:feedback@gov.on.ca e-mail page http://www.gov.on.ca/MBS/english/premier/reply.html To support the calls for inquiries into Gustafsen Lake and into the murder of Dudley George at Stoney Point (aka Ipperwash), please visit: http://kafka.uvic.ca/~vipirg/SISIS/GustLake/support.html http://kafka.uvic.ca/~vipirg/SISIS/Ipperwash/arch01.html Or write S.I.S.I.S. at mailto:sisis@envirolink.org :-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-: S.I.S.I.S. Settlers In Support of Indigenous Sovereignty P.O. Box 8673, Victoria, "B.C." "Canada" V8X 3S2 EMAIL: SISIS@envirolink.org WWW: http://kafka.uvic.ca/~vipirg/SISIS/SISmain.html SOVERNET-L is a news-only listserv concerned with indigenous sovereigntist struggles around the world. To subscribe, send "subscribe sovernet-l" in the body of an email message to For more information on sovernet-l, contact S.I.S.I.S. :-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-: From ua at ahrchk.org Wed Nov 4 12:18:45 1998 From: ua at ahrchk.org (AHRC Urgent Appeal) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 1998 11:18:45 +0800 (HKT) Subject: [asia-apec 842] APPA Labour forum - Information and Programme Message-ID: <199811040318.LAA11438@kwaifong.hk.super.net> Dear friends, Attached are information the APPA Labour Forum. Please note that since labour forum has received no external funding, we cannot afford to subsidise any participant. we will be arranging accomodation from our end. Room rate: RM 40 (twinshare) per night and RM 75 (single room). For food and conference venue, it costs RM 50 for day. If possible, we will try to cover the local expenses, however we appeal to participants contribute for these expenses. regards, Labour Forum --------------------------------------------------------------- Asia-Pacific Peoples' Assembly Confronting Globalisation, Reasserting the Peoples' Rights Invitation to Labour Forum Dear friends, Warmest greetings from Malaysia. The organising committee of the Asia Pacific Peoples' Assembly (APPA) Labour Forum is pleased to invite you to participate in the forum. The Labour Forum, which is part of the Asia Pacific Peoples' Assembly, will be held between 11 and 12 November. The main conference of APPA will be held between 10 to 15 November. The main theme for the Labour Forum is "Globalisation and Workers' Struggle for Employment Security". We call on participants to contribute papers, publications or reports related to the theme. Any materials you wish to share with other participants (even if you could not attend the meeting), please submit them to APPA Secretariat before November 5 in order to be included in the delegate folder. Although the date for APPA is fast approaching, we still have not received any confirmation for funding. If funds are available, subsidies for travel or local expenses will be provided for limited number of people. However, at the present stage the organizing committee could not commit to provide sponsorship for invited participants. We urge you to actively seek other sources of funding. Attached are several documents related the registration of the Assembly. Please fill in the relevant forms and return to the Secretariat. The registration rate of APPA is US50.00. Due to our limitation of fund, it will be helpful that if the more resourceful organisations e.g. trade unions from the North, international or regional bodies, could also contribution some financial support to the Labour Forum. Thank you and looking forward to see you in Kuala Lumpur. Solidarity, ------------------------------------ Tian Chua On behalf of organising committee Important Reminder: 1. Please fax your flight details to APPA secretariat before you fly to Malaysia. 2. APPA volunteers will be stationed at the Kuala Lumpur International Airport to facilitate transport to your hotels, start from Nov 6 - Nov 10, 9.00am - 9.00pm. 3. We would advise you to check multiple purpose of visit in the embarkation form for the immigration. You can check conference, holiday, business etc. 4. According to the new currency policy, you are not permitted to carry into and out of Malaysia, ringgit notes not exceeding RM1,000 per person. Non-resident is permitted to carry out of Malaysia, foreign currency notes including traveler's cheques not exceeding the amount brought in. 5. For emergency, please contact 603-2836245. Please fill in the form below for logistic arrangement and send it back to the secretariat at appasec@tm.net.my or fax 603-2833536. Thank you. Name: ________________________________________________ Organization: ___________________________________________ Country: _______________________________________________ Accommodation: ________________________________________ Flight/Train No: __________________________________________ Arrival Date & Time: ______________________________________ Departure Date & Time: ___________________________________ Program of the Labour Forum: Exposure (9 October) Factory Visit and exchange with trade unions and labour activists in Malaysia Half-day visit Electronic factory: Harris Semiconductor Automobile factory in Klang Valley Day 1 (October 11) 9.00 am Opening speech: Presentation: "Key trends of the workers' movement in the Asia-Pacific region" by ALARM, AMRC and CAW 10.30 am Tea break 11.00 am Workshop will be divided into 4 groups: 1. Women workers - Irene Xavier (Sahabat Wanita) 2. Trade unions - Syed Shahir (NUTEAW) 3. Community and non-formal sector 4. Labour supporting services (AMRC/LRC) Each workshop will discuss what are impacts of globalisation on respective sectors and how to defend workers' rights and employment 11.00 am Workshop: Reflection and evaluation of the present situation (problems, difficulties and opportunities) 1.00 pm Lunch 2.00 pm Workshop (continued): Discussion on demands to put forward and strategy 4.00 pm Report back and plenary 5.30 pm Close 8.00 pm Videos and informal discussion Day 2 (October 12) 9.00 am Inputs: Presentation: experiences of existing struggles (some case presentations of Asia and Latin America) 10.30 am Tea break 11.00 am Workshop on ways of: - Forging solidarity between different sector - Developing common programs 1.00 pm Lunch 2.00 pm Summary and plenary 3.30 pm Tea break 4.00 pm Evaluation of previous cooperation and common program (how to prevent duplication of tasks and avoid repetition of mistakes) 5.00 pm Resolution 8.00 pm Solidarity night Rally (November 15) The workers sector will propose to workers groups and trade unions to hold a rally during the period of APEC. The theme is suggested to be on human rights, employment and food security. ------------------------------------- The End -------------------------------- From panap at panap.po.my Wed Nov 4 11:43:27 1998 From: panap at panap.po.my (PAN Asia Pacific) Date: Wed, 04 Nov 1998 11:43:27 Subject: [asia-apec 843] Confronting Globalization Asserting Our Right to Food! Message-ID: <3079@panap.po.my> Confronting Globalization Asserting Our Right to Food! Forum on Land, Food Security and Agriculture 11 - 12th November 1998 PROGRAMME at a glance DAY 1 (November 11) 8:30-9:30 Registration 9:30-10:15 Opening Plenary Overview of Globalisation and its Impacts on Food Security and Agriculture Issues Speakers: Vandana Shiva (Research Foundation for Science, Technology, and Natural Resource Policy, India) Sarojeni V. Rengam (Pesticide Action Network- Asia and the Pacific, Malaysia) 10:15- 11:15 Overview of Trade Agreements The WTO and Agriculture (Mika Iba, NESFFE) The Impacts of NAFTA on Agriculture and Food Security (Ana de Ita, CECCAM, Mexico) 11:15-1:00 Reports from Grassroots Movements: Country Specific Mexico, Isabel Gomez Lopez, Women's Network of UNORCA Philippines, Rafael Mariano, Peasant Movement of the Philippines Thailand, Assembly of the Poor Malaysia, PACOS and Tenaganita South Korea, Kyeung-Eun Shin, Korean Wheat Revival Movement 1:00-2:00 Lunch 2:00-6:00 Workshops DAY 2 (November 12) Closing Plenary 9:00-11:00 Reports from Workshops 11:00-1:00 Development of Shared Analysis 1:00 - 2:00 Lunch 2:00-4:00 Adoption of Final Statement 4:00-6:00 Common Action (to be announced) FORUM ON LAND, FOOD SECURITY, AND AGRICULTURE November 11-12, Grand Olympic Hotel, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia An issue forum of the Asia-Pacific Peoples' Assembly (APPA) November 10-15, Federal Hotel, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia PAN-Asia and the Pacific and ERA Consumer will host the Forum on Food Security and Agriculture as part of the Asia-Pacific Peoples' Assembly (APPA). APPA takes place November 10-15, 1998 in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. The Forum will be a two-day event at the beginning of the Assembly that will bring together concerned individuals, farmers and representatives of NGOs, people's organizations, and social movements to build on experiences, to develop strategies, and to commit to actions in opposition to current agricultural models being promoted in multilateral forums such as APEC and the WTO. Why a Forum on Land, Food Security, and Agriculture? Globalization has dramatically altered the rural landscape and our systems of food production. The results are devastating: Agricultural land is converted to non-food commercial crops, industrial zones, urban centres, and golf courses, and forest lands are destroyed for mining and logging. Communities are left landless, impoverished, and shattered as corporations reap the profits. Food production is shifted away from local and national needs for basic foods to the demands of transnational agribusiness. In Brazil, local populations go hungry as nearby large-scale farms grow soybeans to feed cattle destined for the North American market. The logic is to increase trade, increase the distance that food travels, increase the amount of processing, and increase the amount of packaging. Those who benefit are corporations. Today, a handful of TNCs have significant control of all aspects of the agriculture and food systems. One company, Cargill, now controls 60 percent of the global cereal trade. And, recent developments in genetic engineering and the rising number of mergers between transnational biotechnology, seed, and agrochemical companies is taking corporate control of the food system to new heights. Agribusiness corporations amass billions and farmers and rural labourers are left with next to nothing; in Malaysia, while plantation company profits rose by over 30 per cent last year alone, plantation workers haven't received real wage increases in the last 10 years. The Asian crisis has quickly made it apparent that the export-led agriculture policies of Asian governments, which left Asians dependent on food imports, were short-sighted. As Asians watch the prices of food escalate, more and more people see the value of local food systems that do not rely on imported foods, chemical inputs, and animal feed. Governments and multilateral institutions, however, continue to ignore the lesson. Liberalisation is pushed along by the WTO, the IMF, and the World Bank, while unfair agricultural subsidies in the North keep prices low, Northern exports high, and small farmers in poverty. The globalisation of food production and agriculture only makes sense to the corporations, large-landholders, and elites that gain from it. For the hundreds of millions of small farmers throughout the world, the logic is devastating. But, the system continues to expand. TNCs are winning the battle in government circles and at the multilateral level. The WTO and its biggest fan, APEC, are pushing a liberalization regime that will open the world up to corporate plunder. This must change. The Forum on Land, Food Security, and Agriculture is about understanding: Who are those driving this brutal system? We will call them by name and reveal what they are doing. The Forum is about resistance: We will take actions against those responsible. We will build our own communities, our own lives. The Forum is also about solidarity: We will come together from all regions of the Asia-Pacific to unite behind a common vision that will strengthen our local struggles. PROGRAMME DAY 1 (November 11) 8:30-9:30 Registration 9:30-10:15 Opening Plenary Overview of Globalisation and its Impacts on Food Security and Agriculture Issues Speakers: Vandana Shiva (Research Foundation for Science, Technology, and Natural Resource Policy, India) Sarojeni V. Rengam (Pesticide Action Network- Asia and the Pacific, Malaysia) 10:15- 11:15 Overview of Trade Agreements The WTO and Agriculture (Mika Iba, NESFFE) The Impacts of NAFTA on Agriculture and Food Security (Ana de Ita, CECCAM, Mexico) 11:15-1:00 Reports from Grassroots Movements: Country Specific Mexico, Isabel Gomez Lopez, Women's Network of UNORCA Philippines, Rafael Mariano, Peasant Movement of the Philippines, Thailand, Assembly of the Poor Malaysia, PACOS and Tenaganita, South Korea, Kyeung-Eun Shin, Korean Wheat Revival Movement 1:00-2:00 Lunch 2:00-6:00 Workshops DAY 2 (November 12) Closing Plenary 9:00-11:00 Reports from Workshops 11:00-1:00 Development of Shared Analysis 1:00 - 2:00 Lunch 2:00-4:00 Adoption of Final Statement 4:00-6:00 Common Action (to be announced) WORKSHOP: GLOBALIZATION INTENSIFIES LANDLESSNESS "Our Struggle for Land is a Struggle for Our Lives!" Lead Organisers: KMP (Philippine Peasant Movement), AMIHAN (Federation of Peasant Women Organizations in the Philippines, APWN (Asian Peasant Women's Network) and the AIWPS (Anti-Imperialist World Peasant Summit - Asian Forum) Objectives: - To show how imperialist globalization intensifies landlessness of the peasantry; - To provide a venue where men and women peasant leaders can share their experiences of resistance against globalization; and - To formulate regional/international peasant action against imperialism and its scheme of globalization. Programme 2:30 p.m. Workshop Orientation by Teresita Oliveros, APWN Convenor, Workshop Moderator Welcome Address by Rafael Mariano, Chairperson, KMP SHARINGS 3:00-3:40 Movimento dos Trabaljadores Rurais Sem Terra (MST), Brazil 3:40-4:00 All India People's Resistance Forum (AIPRF) and/or Workers Party of Bangladesh 4:00-4:20 Tea Break 4:20-5:00 Peasant Leader from South Korea Peasant Leader from Japan Peasant Women's Struggle for Land in San Francisco, Quezon by Carmen Buena, National Chairperson, AMIHAN 5:30-6:45 Open Forum 6:45-7:00 Synthesis by the Moderator 7:00-8:00 Dinner 8:00-9:30 Presentation and Adoption of Resolutions and Unity Statement Action Plans for Regional/International Peasant Actions 9:30-9:45 Closing Remarks 9:45- Solidarity Socials WORKSHOP ON GLOBALISATION AND FISHERIES: "Fisherfolk Says No to Monopoly Capital's Thirst for Profit" Lead Organisers: PAMALAKAYA (National Federation of Fisherfolk Organizations in the Philippines) and NACFAR (Nationwide Coalition of the Fisherfolk for Aquatic Reform - Philippines) Concept: Many of the world's most productive ecosystems are found in Asia. The region has nine of the world's top fishing nations. Ironically, the developing countries of the region have not been able to derive full benefits from their resources. It is rather the developed and affluent countries which have profited from the exploitation of the region's resources. Over the years, the fisheries sector has been on the decline all over the world, but the solutions that governments, especially Asian regimes under pressure from global powers, resort to are liberalization, denationalization and privatization. Lately, fishery plans under Asian governments have become the center of attraction in the drive for "globalization" because Asian fisheries has become the primary target of Japanese, US and European trade and investments. Wide open are the opportunities to "globalize" the capital and products of multinational and transnational corporations (MNCs/TNCs) facilitated by provisions of WTO agreements and speeded up by regional trade blocks like NAFTA and APEC. "Globalization," government leaders and technocrats claim, is the panacea to the woes of the sector and the poverty of the fisherfolk. "Globalization" has given rise instead to the uncontrolled expansion of large fishing fleets mercilessly devastating productive fishing grounds with their ever advancing technology and ever present capital. The result is monopoly of vast waters in the hands of those who already have the most concentration of capital and the "best" of technology -- the MNCs/TNCs -- and the global powers -- the US, Japan and the EU. The wholesale commercialization and subsequent disintegration of vital fishery resource bases are then used to rationalize the expansion of unsustainable corporate aquaculture operations as a placebo to the continued collapse of coastal and traditional capture fisheries production. Worsened is the degradation of the already critically fragile coastal zone ecosystems. In the end, supposed hopes of `saving the environment' become naught with the reality of unabated degradation of coastal and offshore resources and ecosystems. "Globalization" renders traditional fisheries uncompetitive through the systematic manipulation of national programs and policies to suit the profiteering motives of capital-intensive, commercially-efficient, high-valued and export-geared fisheries production. What it results into are highly unsustainable fishing practices, fishery trade crises, and the uncontrollable price increases of basic fishery commodities. The capitalist-imperialist competition for fishery enclaves causes the vicious depravity of millions of artisanal fisherfolk and the dangerous imperilment of food security all over the world. But the very same phenomenon of imperialist globalization that intensifies global economic and financial crisis strengthens fisherfolk and peoples' resolve to resist and to struggle to change their situation. Objectives: Rally strong opposition to corporate take-over of fishing grounds and hold multinational and domestic fishing monopolies liable for the rapid destruction of the marine environment and aquatic resources. Come up with a united position against GATT/WTO and APEC impositions and programs in fisheries and take a solid stand against trade arrangements and other instruments of imperialist and state maneuverings. Expand and strengthen fisherfolk participation in a broad movement against globalization's onslaught on food security and on nations' economies and peoples Programme: 2.00-2.30 Workshop Introduction 2.30-4.30 Presentations: - Liberalization & Privatization in Fisheries: Impact, Fisherfolk Resistance and Alternatives (PAMALAKAYA) - Impact of Globalization on Marine Environment and Aquatic Resources (India) - Case Studies: * commercial aquaculture (Bangladesh, Thailand or Sri Lanka) * extensive commercial fishing (Chile or Canada) * BIMP-EAGA (NACFAR) 4.30-5.00 Tea Break 5.00-7.00 Open Forum: Further discussion of issues and sharing of struggles and alternatives 7.00-8.00 Dinner 8.00-10.00 Open Forum: Resolutions and Statement of Unity WORKSHOP ON TRADE AGREEMENTS Lead Organiser: (MODE Inc., Philippines) Concept: On December 10, 1998, the world will celebrate the 50th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. We take this occasion, the holding of the Forum on Food Security and Agriculture to affirm first and foremost the basic human Right to Food. Everyone has the right to secure access at all times to safe and nutritious food and water adequate to sustain an active and healthy life with dignity. In many countries in Asia-Pacific, growing demands for trade liberalization are transforming structures of production, trade and consumption in the agricultural and food sectors. Throughout the region there is growing concern about the impact of these changes on rural livelihoods and national food security. An overwhelming concern of governments in all developing countries, especially those in Southeast Asia, has long been in ensuring a 'cheap food' supply for ever-expanding concentrations of urban populations and growing numbers of landless workers in the rural areas. At the same time domestic and foreign agribusiness corporations have actively promoted the development of 'high value crops' for the export market. Many developing governments have pursued these objectives and responded to these developments in very different ways, with decidedly different outcomes on patterns of food production, trade and consumption, as well as on the relative incomes and freedom from hunger of food and non-food producers in the agricultural sector, on men and women, and rural and urban populations more generally. With the growing trend toward trade liberalization, in the context of the World Trade Organization (WTO) as well as efforts to consolidate Asian Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC), the issue of food security is emerging as a common concern throughout the Asia-Pacific. In each country processes are under way to determine how to respond to demands by the North, especially the US, that developing countries liberalize their agricultural, especially their food markets. Of particular relevance is the need for a more thorough understanding of the interplay between the ASEAN Free Trade Area (AFTA) and the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) forum, and how both regional trade mechanisms shape and are shaped by the relations between individual states and ASEAN on the one hand, and between ASEAN and the other members of APEC on the other. The discourse on trade liberalization within the context of regional trade blocs has often been conditioned by an almost singular view that all regional trade blocs operate in the same way, and share a coherence in objectives with global trade integration as proposed by the GATT-WTO. Workshop Programme: 2:00-2:40 Inputs: Dr. James Goodman - MAI and International Trade Dr. Walden Bello - Current Status and Directions of the WTO Negotiations on Agreement on Agriculture and NGO/PO Positioning 2:40-5:00 (Tea Break at 3:45) The Impact of Trade Agreements on Food Security - Sharing of Experiences by Country (2 hours) Discussion and Consensus on Impact of Trade Agreements (What is common among countries?) -jobs/employment -access to resources -food availability (production) -food affordability (prices) -women (2 hours) HEY TNCs: YOU CAN'T FEED THE WORLD ON GREED! Workshop on Transnational Corporations Lead Organiser: Pesticide Action Network Asia and the Pacific Concept: "Hunger is the offspring of injustice and the unequal distribution of wealth in this world" -Fidel Castro Today, a few transnational corporations (TNCs) dominate the world's food system. The statistics are appalling: Cargill, a US based company, controls 77 per cent of the global cereal trade; 5 TNCs control between them 90 per cent of the export trade of each of wheat, corn, coffee, tea, pineapple, cotton, tobacco, jute, and forest products; and Monsanto, one of the largest and most notorious agrochemical and biotechnology companies, is now one of the world's largest seed distributors. Food and agriculture has become big business, and the losers far outnumber the winners. The transformation of the food system is part of globalisation. Globalisation, among other things, consolidates wealth in the hands of a few and impoverishes many. TNCs are the major beneficiaries of this process, and they have well-planned strategies to ensure that this process continues. This is certainly true of the food and agriculture industry. TNCs are now using genetic engineering and multilateral trade bodies and lending institutions to protect their interests and guarantee their markets. The current picture is bleak, but throughout the world there is resistance. Farmers and consumers in Europe are fighting against the introduction of genetically engineered crops and food. In India, farmers destroyed Cargill seeds and forced the company from opening operations at a northern port. In Thailand, farmers are leading a protest against the attempts of an American company to patent Jasmine rice. The struggle, however, is arduous; TNCs wield resources and influence. In order to succeed, we will have to understand corporate strategies and the mechanisms that they use to protect and promote their interests. The workshop on TNCs will help participants to understand corporate control of the food system and to find the best ways to resist it. Objectives: 1. Analysis: The workshop will develop an analysis of corporate strategies that highlights how TNCs seek to control the food system. The analysis will give specific attention to TNC public relations, to the benefits of trade liberalisation and trade bodies for TNCs, and to the influence of TNCs with government and trade bodies. The analysis will also focus on the impacts of corporate strategies on the food system, specifically on national and household food security. 2. Actions: Workshop participants will use the analysis to decide on a plan of action. The actions will consider various means of resistance: monitoring at the macro and micro levels; direct actions by NGOs, farmers, consumers and activists; and using existing international mechanisms and instruments or developing new ones. Programme: November 11, Grand Olympic Hotel 2:00-2:15 Introduction : Sarojeni V. Rengam (PAN-AP, Malaysia) 2:15-2:45 Overview of TNCs and the Food System, Brewster Kneen, (Canada) Mr. Kneen will speak specifically about the corporate strategies of Cargill and Monsanto; two of the world's greediest TNCs. Mr. Kneen will highlight the implications of their strategies for the global food system. He will also share his views about how trade liberalisation and multilateral trade bodies promote the interests of these TNCs. Mr. Kneen will end his talk with suggestions for action. 2:45-3:45 Stories of Corporate Greed and the Power of Resistance TNC Handouts: No Thanks! Farhad Mazhar, (UBINIG, Bangladesh) Mr. Mazhar will describe how agribusiness is using development agencies to promote its selfish interests. He will share the example of how TNCs used the recent floods in Bangladesh to push wheat imports. Farhad will then talk about the Naya Krishi movement and other ways that people in Bangladesh are resisting TNCs. Don't Believe the Hype! Barbara Dinham (Pesticides Trust, UK) Ms. Dinham will speak about the public relations strategies of Pesticide and Food TNCs in Europe. She will also describe the European campaigns and actions to counter these PR strategies. TNCs: Get out of Asia! Dr. Romy Quijano (PAN Philippines) Dr. Quijano will speak about his own experiences in confronting agribusiness corporations. He will also speak about TNC operations in Asia and what the future implications are for the Asian food system. He will then speak about the various mechanism of resistance that have been used in Asia, such as the PAN Community Pesticide Action Kit for monitoring at the micro level. 3:45-4:00 Tea Break 4:00-5:00 Deepening of the Analysis 5:00-7:00 Action Planning WORKSHOP ON GRASSROOTS RESISTANCE AND ALTERNATIVES Lead Organiser: SRED (Tamil Nadu) Concept: Land has become a commercial commodity. Lands are taken away from indigenous people. Common lands, grazing lands are bought by Multinational Companies (MNCs) to grow cash crops like teak and cashew. Deep borewells are sunk and groundwater is extracted and monopolised by companies, robbing communities of their basic right to water. Land alienation is the deprival of farmers rights. The poor become poorer from the 'Real Estate' business. Rights are denied in the name of 'liberalisation policy'. After green, white and blue revolutions there is now a Floriculture revolution: the cultivation of flowers for export on lands once used for food. Today, Maxwell Orchards Ltd. is a modern-day zamindar. In India, they are converting thousands of acres of productive land into orchards. "Plant a seed; leave it to Maxworth you will harvest a fortune: bread, labour, social justice: old fashioned!" -Bastian Whenga The globalisation of agriculture does not address the problem of mass poverty. Export-oriented, high-tech operations do not protect or develop the livelihoods and health of the rural poor. This mode of production does not generate useful or remunerative employment. Instead, it undermines food security. Export-agriculture replaces subsistence farming and eucalyptus and teak replace food crops. Intellectual property rights replace the right to food. And, within this globalised system, there are no measures for conservation of natural bio-diversity. Women are threatened by this system. Within it, their labour is invisible. Poverty is feminized and women are increasingly exploited. They lose access to property which was once common: land, water, trees. They are forced to migrate and often end up selling their bodies to earn a livelihood. "Lack of property and resources deny women the ability to define themselves." -Gail Omvedt In Tamil Nadu, however, there are many struggles against the globalisation of agriculture: · On October 10, 1996, in a protest by over 1000 Dalits struggling to reclaim lands once given to them, two Dalits are shot and killed. · 13 villages form a committee to halt construction of a dam at Ramancheri · Women demand "house pattas": a landownership title to build houses on the women's name. · The Farmer's Liberation Front cuts down trees at Anubhav Teak Plantations, Sankarapuram. Successful campaign to stop prawn aquaculture in Tamil Nadu. Landless Labourers Movement continues to struggle to stop the mechanisation of harvesting. · Fisherfolk agitate to stop foreign vessels from fishing in "exclusive Economic Zones" The workshop will focus on the struggles taking place in Tamil Nadu, and will also look at other struggles and alternatives taking place within the Asia-Pacific region. The workshop will also consider alternative models to the current export-oriented model pushed by APEC, the World Bank, the WTO, and most governments: · Common property · Local, rural markets · Collective action and model cooperatives for collective farming · Collection of native seeds and seed banks · Peasant movements for land · Pesticide-free, Natural organic farming · Networking, campaigning, and advocacy-legal and social · Questioning government policies for liberalisation and privatisation. Programme: Resource people Tamil Nadu: Burned Fathima (SRED) S. Ganapathi (Farmer) Dhanapal (Landless Labourers Movement) M. Venkataiyan (Dalit Peoples Movement) Peru: Luis Gomero (RAAA) Philipines: Elpidio Peria (SEARICE) Malaysia: Elizabeth Thomas (Tenaganita) Jennifer Mourin (PAN AP) From appasec at tm.net.my Wed Nov 4 14:49:15 1998 From: appasec at tm.net.my (appasec) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 1998 13:49:15 +0800 Subject: [asia-apec 844] Fw: APPA (fwd) Message-ID: <002c01be07b6$e06350c0$0100a8c0@tmnet.tm.net.my> > >FORWARDED MAIL ------- >From: markb@gn.apc.org (Mark Brown) >Date: 03 Nov 98 > >>Political pie-slingers on the move in San Francisco >> >>For Immediate Release: October 27, 1998 >> >>San Francisco - The chief executive of one of the world's biggest >>corporations was struck in the face with a tofu creme pie on Tuesday night >>at the "State of the World Forum" conference in the Fairmont Hotel. The >>incident occurred after Shapiro gave a keynote address on the brave new >>world of genetic engineering. The "Anti-Genetix" splinter faction of the >>Biotic Baking Brigade (BBB) claimed credit for the gustatory assault, which >>was code-named "Operation Safe Harvest." The BBB is aligned with Belgian >>pieman Noel Godin's International Patisserie Brigade, who are responsible >>for pieing Bill Gates and many other deserving targets. >> >>"The Biotic Baking Brigade doesn't just promise pie in the sky, we deliver" >>said a BBB operative named Apple, who served as Special Agent-in-Charge of >>this operation. Continuing its autumn campaign against corporate crime, the >>pie incident was the second BBB offensive this month. Nobel Laureate >>neoliberal economist Milton Friedman suffered the same fate as Shapiro on >>October 9, 1998, at the Marriot Hotel in San Francisco, during the "School >>Choice and Corporate America" conference. >> >>After Shapiro gave his speech and left the stage, he stopped to engage in a >>dialogue with a heckler on genetic engineering and corporate crime. It was >>at this point that BBB Field Agents Custard and Lemon Meringue approached >>him and let fly with tofu creme and sweet potato pies, the first of which >>reached its target. Shapiro barely stopped to wipe his glasses and face >>before returning to the argument, exclaiming loudly "Roundup is perfectly >>safe!", and continued in that vein until he was escorted >>out of the banquet hall by handlers and security. Custard and Lemon >>Meringue were detained by security and arrested by San Francisco Police. >>Custard has been charged with misdemeanor battery and will appear in court >>Wednesday morning, while at this time Lemon Meringue may be released >>without charge. >> >>The vegan tofu creme pie symbolized the millions of acres of Monsanto's >>genetically-engineered soybean crops and other "Frankenfoods" coming to >>harvest this season, dangerous foods which people have been powerless to >>stop thus far. The sweet potato pie was tossed in recognition of the recent >>New York Times Sunday Magazine cover story (October 25), which detailed the >>fraud, deception, and legacy of poison Monsanto has given the world, using >>the genetically-engineered (GE) "New Leaf Russet Burbank Potato" as an >>example. >> >>"Monsanto has engaged in ruthless intimidation of critics; embarked upon an >>aggressive global takeover of seed, chemical, and pharmaceutical companies, >>with an aim to control world food distribution; and is conducting an >>intensive PR "Greenwash" campaign in order to promote itself as an >>eco-friendly corporation. We will not be fooled, and we will wage our >>gastronomical struggle with epicurean passion" said Agent Apple. "Monsanto >>and its subsidiaries have spread chemical death across every continent >>through products such as PCBs, Agent Orange, Bovine Growth Hormone, >>Nutrasweet, Equal, and Roundup (the world's biggest selling herbicide). >>The corporation's toxic Superfund sites poison workers and community >>members, and its dioxins will continue to cause birth defects and major >>health problems for generations to come." The EPA has designated Monsanto >>as a "potentially responsible party" at 93 Superfund sites. >> >>************************************************************ >> >>The Shapiro Pie Incident: A Strange And Terrible Saga. >>An Eyewitness Account, Along with a Few Thoughts and Literary Allusions. >>Composed on October 28, 1998. >> >>Last Friday afternoon I was contacted by a BBB intelligence source known as >>"Deep Pastry." S/he communicated to me that Robert Shapiro, CEO and >>Chairman of Monsanto, would be delivering a keynote address at a conference >>the following Tuesday. We had heard from Our Man in London recently that >>the Brits were planning to pie him next time he crossed the Atlantic, and >>naturally we couldn't let the Limeys upstage us in this respect, because >>they already have in every other form of anti-GE activism. >> >>Thusly and therefore, I immediately relayed the information to the General >>Command of the BBB, whose Headquarters and Ovens are located deep in the >>heart of the Headwaters Redwood Forest. The following day I received my >>orders: compile a dossier on the target (photos, personal habits, culinary >>preferences, etc.), perform an extensive reconnaissance of the battlefield >>(the illustrious Fairmont Hotel, where Clinton and his ilk stay when they >>come to town), assemble a crack pie-slinging team, develop a set of combat >>scenarios, and await the go-ahead command. >> >>By Tuesday afternoon, everything was in place. I went to the pre-arranged >>bake shop (name withheld for obvious reasons), ordered a apple-rubarb >>crumble to go, and repaired to the pub. Even though I expected the document >>and have been through the routine before, I couldn't help but tremble a tad >>when I reached the bottom of the patisserie and uncovered the sealed and >>embossed envelope which read, "Special Agent Apple: For Your Eyes Only." I >>had received the green light: the plan was a go. We were to commence >>"Operation Safe Harvest" at 18.00 hrs., and carry out the mission by any >>means necessary. >> >>By 18.07 the "Anti-Genetix" splinter faction had penetrated the tight >>security perimeter, and we were surrounded by dozens of the world's >>corporate and socio-political elite. This year's annual "State of the World >>Forum" enjoyed an attendence of 900 individuals from 103 nations and >>tribes, and cost a mere $5,000 per ticket. It is perhaps the classic >>example of liberal, consensus, win-win, Clinton-esque, spin-doctor, >>sell-out, cultural appropriation, commodification-of-dissent-type event in >>the world today. >> >>We were indistinguishable from the other suits in the room, and probed the >>reception for our target while drinking wine and chatting with heavy >>politicos and corporados from across the globe. As the reader can imagine, >>it was all quite surreal, and I recalled the tale of an activist in London >>who snuck into a soiree of Shell Oil executives. Shapiro was nowhere in >>sight, so when the reception ended we proceeded to the banquet hall for a >>lovely dinner. After a welcome from Mayor Willie Brown (who has turned San >>Francisco into a haven for big business and development, and recently >>endorsed a massive biotech factory for the city's East Side) and remarks >>from the Forum's moderators, Reg Brack (Chairman Emeritus, Time >>Incorporated) began the keynote addresses by launching into an ode to the >>triumph of capitalism over communism, information-age technology over real >>communities and the natural world, Reason over the forces of Darkness blah >>blah blah. A few hisses emanated from the audience when Brack celebrated >>the giant retail book superstores spreading across Amerika, and the on-line >>book chain www.amazon.com selling books through cyberspace. His cold >>steel-blue eyes gazed imperiously over the assemblage via two enormous >>video screens. The speech met with resounding applause. >> >>Next, the moderator introduced our man, Bob Shapiro, as a great progressive >>and a pleasure to have at the Forum. Cautious applause mingled with murmurs >>of dissent, perhaps because there were people inside and outside the event >>distributing copies of the special "Monsanto Files" issue of The Ecologist. >>After thousands of copies were printed, Monsanto's people got to the >>printshop and managed to scare them so badly that the printers shredded the >>entire print run rather than face the wrath of the Genetix Bad Boys. The >>Ecologist apparently managed to find a printer with a spine, and dozens of >>copies were express mailed to San Francisco, arriving that afternoon just >>in time to make the event. The presence of a protest outside by concerned >>citizens against Monsanto was felt inside as well. >> >>This was the moment of truth in the theatre of modern pie warfare. Shapiro >>stepped to the stage, and delivered a speech that couldn't have been >>crafted better by Monsanto's PR firm Burson-Marstellar itself (the >>wonderful people who have greenwashed the dirty laundry of many filthy >>corporations and governments). But then again, the speech most likely was >>written by them. >> >>I could barely contain myself, the tension was so great. Shapiro waxed >>grandiloquently about Monsanto's crucial role in saving the earth from soil >>erosion, pollution, overpopulation, famine, and the destructiveness of >>industrial society. I kid you not. He described the inherent wastefulness >>of cars and other industrial products, especially agricultural. His >>solution: more technology. At this point, my eyes began scanning the table >>for any remains of the scrumptious chocolate cake we were served for >>dessert, and I almost leaned across the table and grabbed a slice with the >>intention of storming the stage right then and there perforce. Luckily, the >>intensive training I've undergone as a BBB field operative clicked in, and >>I restrained myself by sticking my hands under my buttocks and diverting my >>gaze away from his wild eyes, which were darting to and fro across the Big >>Brother screen. >> >>Finally, he finished his speech, and left the podium in a hurry. I >>perceived Agents Custard and Lemon Meringue approaching him directly, and >>so I prepared for a delicious case of culinary comeuppance. As Caesar said >>from the banks of the wide river Rubicon, while gazing across at Rome, "The >>pie is cast." >> >>A young man at a table near the stage stopped Shapiro cold in his tracks >>with cries of "shame, shame!" A dialogue ensued, and then from Shapiro's >>three o'clock angle two pies originating from suited figures went airborne. >>The first made delightful contact with his upper left facial quadrant and >>left eyeglass piece, while the second sailed past harmlessly. Our victim >>directed some verbal unpleasantries toward the rapidly departing flan-ers, >>quickly wiped his face, turned back toward the seated fellow and continued >>with raised intensity to declare that Roundup was perfectly safe for the >>planet. >> >>One of the moderators stepped to the microphone to introduce none other >>than Anita Roddick, the Body Shop global consumer conquistadora (you can >>actually shop for a better world!), who desperately needs some pastry >>treatment herself. Meanwhile, Shapiro continued to make a scene, but his >>handlers quickly took him by the elbow and hustled him out while wiping his >>head with a towel....a scene your humble correspondent will never forget, >>one which would cheer the hearts and souls of millions across our lonely >>planet. I found inside my own breast a peace which passeth all >>understanding. >> >>Agents Custard and Lemon Meringue were last seen making quick strides >>through a side exit door, with security in hot pursuit. The rest of the BBB >>foot soldiers managed to escape at staggered intervals. We later found out >>our comrades were detained and arrested, but even the notoriously brutal >>SFPD managed to crack a laugh: "Hey, it's those pie people again!" >> >>The General Command wishes to dedicate this action to the brilliant and >>utterly inspiring activists in Europe who have kicked off the anti-Genetix >>revolution. In particular, we salute the pixies and sprites who tear up GE >>fields by day and night, through cricket matches and other sporting >>ventures; the Genetic Engineering Network, who put out excellent >>information and keep the industry under an eagle's eye; the Genetix >>Snowball campaigners for their pie-a-neering efforts; and a dear friend who >>has been nobly toiling away at the office while her heart has been pining >>for direct action in the field. Cheers, mates! No pasaran! Viva Gerard >>Winstanley! >> >>And so dear readers, with that I close this faithful account of the Shapiro >>Pie Incident, written and delivered to you at 5.57 hrs. after quite an >>eventful night, having run out of reserves of adrenaline and strong proper >>black tea. In the spirit of the Lincolnshire Loppers, I remain yours >>always, >> >>Special Agent Apple, Biotic Baking Brigade >>Boysenberry Prairie, Headwaters Forest, Ecotopia >> >>PS: can someone please pass this on to Noel Godin, the "entarteur" himself? >>By the way, a fan of his created a website, and it's a must see for any >>serious political pastry cognoscente: >>http://www.cinenet.net/users/jaybab/noel.html >>******************************************** >>"Cast a cold pie, on life, on death. Horseman, pass by." --The epitaph >>William Butler Yeats wrote for his tombstone in a Sligo County cemetery, >>under Ben Bulben. >> >>"Every Day Is Pie Day." --BBB mediation and morning salutation > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ >Earth First! Journal >POB 1415, Eugene, OR 97440-1415 USA >(541) 344-8004, fax 344-7688 >http://www.envirolink.org/orgs/ef > >Subscriptions are $25/year (USA) >$35 1st class (US, Canada, Mexico) or Surface Mail International >$45 Air Mail International > >An international Earth First! web address is: http://www.k2net.co.uk/ef > >"May your trails be crooked, winding, lonesome, dangerous, leading to > the most amazing view." -- Edward Abbey > > >#########@@@@@@@@@@@{{{{{{{{{{+++++++++++++++++******************* >For instant relief, take T?R?A?N?S?N?A?T?I?O?N?A?L R$E$S$I$S$T$A$N$C$E >on JUNE 18th 1999: >INTERNATIONAL DAY OF ACTION AIMED AT THE HEART OF THE GLOBAL ECONOMY >*Subscribe to J18discussion@gn.apc.org for dialogue and info-share* >& Go here today: http://www.gn.apc.org/rts/ >88888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888 > > From tpl at cheerful.com Wed Nov 4 21:38:38 1998 From: tpl at cheerful.com (BAYAN) Date: Wed, 04 Nov 1998 20:38:38 +0800 Subject: [asia-apec 845] Workshop: Globalization Intensifies Landlessness Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.19981104203838.006c08e0@pop.skyinet.net> WORKSHOP: GLOBALIZATION INTENSIFIES LANDLESSNESS "Our Struggle for Land is a Struggle for Our Lives!" OF THE: Forum on Land, Food Security and Agriculture Hotel Grand Olympic Nov 11-12, 1998 Convenors: KMP (Peasant Movement of the Philippines) AMIHAN (Federation of Peasant Women in the Philippines) Asian Peasant Women's Network (APWN) Asian Forum of AIWPS (Anti-Imperialist World Peasant Summit) Objectives: - show how imperialist globalization intensifies landlessness; - share experiences of peasant resistance against globalization; and - plan regional/international peasant action against imperialism and its scheme of globalization. PROGRAMME 2:30 p.m. Workshop Orientation by Teresita Oliveros, Moderator Asian Peasant Women's Network (APWN) and AMIHAN 2:40 Welcome Address and Overview by Rafael Mariano Chairperson, KMP and Chairperson, BAYAN SHARINGS BY 3:10 Elemar Cezimbra do Nascimento Movimento dos Trabaljadores Rurais sem Terra (MST), Brazil 3:50 Deba Prasad Sarkar Vice President, All India Peasants and Agricultural Workers' Organization (AIKKMS) 4:10 Tea Break 4:30 Carmelita Buena Chairperson, AMIHAN Philippines 4:50 Dianto Backriadi Deputy Chairperson Consortium for Agrarian Reform (KPA) Indonesia 5:10 Sharing from the First World * Mika Iba, Japan * C. Brewster, Canada 5:50 Open Forum 7:00 Dinner 8:00 Synthesis by Moderator 8:15 Discussion and Adoption of Resolutions and Unity Statement 9:45 Closing Remarks 10:00 Solidarity Socials From tpl at cheerful.com Wed Nov 4 23:04:48 1998 From: tpl at cheerful.com (BAYAN) Date: Wed, 04 Nov 1998 22:04:48 +0800 Subject: [asia-apec 846] Workshop on Strategies, Gains and Challenges in Women's Struggle Against Globalization Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.19981104220448.006c19d8@pop.skyinet.net> FINAL PROGRAMME WORKSHOP ON STRATEGIES, GAINS AND CHALLENGES IN WOMEN'S STRUGGLE AGAINST GLOBALIZATION November 8 (2:30 - 10:00 p.m.) Olympic Hall 2, Hotel Grand Olympic 3rd International Women's Conference Against APEC November 8-9, 1998 Hotel Grand Olympic, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia Sponsored by: Asia Pacific Forum on Women, Law and Development (APWLD) GABRIELA (National Alliance of Women's Organizations in the Philippines) SRED (Society for Rural Education and Development), Madras Tamilnadu Women's Forum PROGRAMME: 02:30 Introduction by Elisa Tita Lubi of APWLD and GABRIELA 03:00 Resist Imperialist Globalization: A Challenge to Women by Dr. Pao-Yu Ching University professor and social activist, U.S. and Taiwan 03:20 Impact of Globalization and Challenges for South Asian Women by Nimalka Fernando, President, IMADR 03:40 Legal Strategies in the Hands of Women by Rani Jethmalani Advocate to the Supreme Court of India Chairperson, WARLAW 04:00 Rural Women's Caravan by Sarawathy, Tamilnadu Women's Forum, India 04:30 Tea Break 05:00 Women Organizing in the Philippines * Organizing Women Workers by Nenita Miranda, Secretary General KMK (Women Workers' Movement) * Organizing Women Youth & Students by Maricel Gavina, Chairperson, GABRIELA Youth 06:00 From the Point of View of Socialist Women by Joan Hinton a former nuclear physicist who has worked in agriculture in China in the past 50 years 06:40 The Indonesian Situation by Kalyanamitra Foundation 07:00 Dinner 08:00 The Indonesian Situation (Continued) by women from Aceh, West Papua (Irian Jaya) and East Timor 08:45 Open Forum: Issues; Discussion and Adoption of Unity Statement and Resolutions 10:00 Adjourn Bring draft resolutions that you would like the workshop to discuss and adopt. See you at the OLYMPIC HALL 2, HOTEL GRAND OLYMPIC! From samysd at HK.Super.NET Thu Nov 5 03:31:50 1998 From: samysd at HK.Super.NET (Sinapan Samydorai) Date: Thu, 05 Nov 1998 02:31:50 +0800 Subject: [asia-apec 847] APPA HUMAN RIGHTs FORUM - Asia Needs Regional Human Rights Mechanisms Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.19981105023150.00ade8b8@pop.hk.super.net> ASIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION Unit D, 7th Floor, Mongkok Commercial Centre, 16 - 16B Argyle Street, Kowloon, HONGKONG Tel: +(852) - 2698-6339 Fax: +(852) - 2698-6367 E-mail: AHRC Programme Coordinator ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear Friends, Below is an article for delegates to the HUMAN RIGHTs FORUM (1998 Asia-Pacific People's Assembly on APEC) on the human rights situation in ASEAN countries. This paper is forward to you for your preparation and reflections. Please forward to us your country situationers [Human Rights]. Sincerely Yours, Sinapan Samydorai Programme Coordinator Asian Human Rights Commission ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Multicultural Asia Needs Regional Human Rights Mechanisms by Sunil Coorey (Ed. note: Sunil Coorey is the president of Vigil Lanka Movement. His following views was presented at the international conference to declare the ASIAN HUMAN RIGHTS CHARTER in Kwangju, south Korea, on 14-17 May 1998.) Within the institutional framework created by the United Nations Charter in 1945, the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) has been established to serve, subject to the ultimate authority of the General Assembly, as the principal organ of the United Nations concerned with human rights. In 1946 the ECOSOC established the Commission on Human Rights. The Commission frequently employs working groups and special rapporteurs to carry out its work of promoting and monitoring human rights throughout the world. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights was adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations in 1948. The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), together with the two Optional Protocols, and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, which came into force in 1976, are also intended to be of universal application by ratification by States in all parts of the world. These documents constitute what is called the "International Bill of Human Rights." The ICCPR has an 18-member Human Rights Committee which is concerned with reports submitted by States that are parties to the Covenant, regarding measures taken to give effect to the rights enumerated in the Covenant. The Committee has jurisdiction to hear complaints between States under Article 41 of the Covenant. The Committee also has jurisdiction regarding complaints by individuals against States which are parties to the (first) Optional Protocol. Apart from the International Bill of Human Rights, there are numerous other international declarations which have declared international human rights, such as the Declaration on the Right to Development adopted by the U.N. General Assembly in 1986 and the Declarations of Tunis, San Jose and Bangkok made at three regional conferences held in those cities in preparation for the World Conference on Human Rights held in Vienna in 1993. At the conclusion of the World Conference, the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action was adopted unanimously by 171 governments, representing 99 percent of the world's population. Acting on one of the recommendations of the World Conference on Human Rights in Vienna, the U.N. General Assembly in 1993 established the High Commissioner for Human Rights for the promotion and protection of all human rights. Thus, it is clear today that there is no real dearth of international standards regarding human rights that are of universal application. There are numerous agencies within the U.N. system for the protection, promotion and propagation of human rights. The Commission on Human Rights and the Human Rights Committee under the ICCPR are engaged in the monitoring and enforcement of internationally recognised human rights. For the last 40 years the United Nations Programme of Advisory Services in the Field of Human Rights has been in operation, providing assistance in the field of human rights to governments which request same, advisory services of experts, fellowships and scholarships and seminars. Why Need Regional Standards and Mechanisms In the context of the above, what, one may ask, is the need to set up regional human rights standards and regional mechanisms for their promotion, monitoring and enforcement? The answer, according to one jurist, Dr. Nihal Jayawickrema of Hong Kong, is that "it is easier for a small group of States which share a common political, legal, cultural or spiritual heritage to agree upon institutions for the more effective scrutiny of their own performance than it is for the mixed and varied groups that together form the enormous international community. And within those regional institutions it is possible for each of the member States to play a relatively more significant role than they possibly can on the world stage." For example, in the absence of an institution in the nature of a regional court of human rights, an individual who is subject to the jurisdiction of a State, which is a party to the (first) Optional Protocol to the ICCPR, must complain to the Human Rights Committee that sits in Geneva. Further, the monitoring, protection and promotion of human rights by regional mechanisms could be expected to be more prompt and effective than by mechanisms having to act worldwide. More recently the international community has unequivocally called for the setting up of regional bodies for human rights. Article 37 of Part 1 of the Vienna Declaration declares: "Regional arrangements play a fundamental role in promoting and protecting human rights. They should reinforce universal human rights standards, as contained in international human rights instruments and their protection. The World Conference on Human Rights endorses efforts under way to strengthen these arrangements and to increase their effectiveness, while at the same time stressing the importance of cooperation with the United Nations human rights activities. The World Conference on Human Rights reiterates the need to consider the possibility of establishing regional and sub-regional arrangements for the promotion and protection of human rights where they do not already exist." During the 50 years that elapsed since the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, human rights standards have been set at regional levels in Europe, America and Africa. Several mechanisms operating outside the U.N. system have also been set up in those three regions for the protection and promotion of human rights and for the enforcement of human rights. Those mechanisms are voluntarily sponsored mainly by the States in each such region. Regimes in Europe In 1950 members of the Council of Europe signed the European Convention on Human Rights. The Convention, which came into force in 1953, contains a comprehensive statement of the civil and political rights believed to be common to the peoples of Europe. Although originally the Convention was the creation of the States of Western Europe, since the end of the Cold War many of the former Socialist European States have become parties to the Convention. The European Convention is similar in scope to the ICCPR, but its provisions relating to the enforcement are considerably more effective than that in the ICCPR and the (first) Optional Protocol. The application of the European Convention is overseen by three bodies. First, the Commission on Human Rights, which deals with the great majority of alleged violations of the Convention, is comprised of a number of independent individuals in equal number to the number of parties to the Convention. Secondly, the Committee of Ministers, which consists formally of the foreign ministers of the members of the Council of Europe, although in practice its powers are exercised by appointed deputies. Thirdly, the European Court of Human Rights, situated in Strasbourg, France, comprises judges equal in number to the members of the Council of Europe and is the judicial arm of the Convention. The decisions of the Court are binding in international law on the parties to the Convention according to the terms of the Convention. A decision could include a human right provided for by the Convention. All decisions of the Court are reported in the European Human Rights Reports and constitute an important source of human rights law. American Arrangements In 1948 the Ninth Conference of American States adopted the American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man. Although at that stage it contained no enforcement provisions, it acted as an impetus to human rights law in the Western hemisphere. In 1960 the Inter-American Commission of Human Rights was established. In 1969 the Organisation of American States (OAS) adopted the American Convention on Human Rights, which included provisions for the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. The American Convention protects rights broadly similar to those protected under the European Convention of 1950. On signing the American Convention on Human Rights, States accept the right of individual complaint to the Inter-American Commission of Human Rights. Mechanisms in Africa In 1979 a United Nations Seminar on the Establishment of Regional Commissions on Human Rights with Special Reference to Africa was held in Monrovia, Liberia. This was the final impetus for the adoption of an African system for the protection of human rights. In 1981, the 18th Assembly of Heads of State and Government of the Organisation of African Unity (OAU) adopted the Organisation of African Unity Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights, which came to be called the Banjul Charter. This Charter came into force in 1986 when a majority of the OAU member States had ratified it. It covers a wider range of rights than the European Convention and the American Convention. It provides for political, civil, economic and cultural rights, which are regarded as the second and third generation human rights. The enforcement of the Charter is through the African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights, which has general supervisory functions and jurisdiction under a compulsory system of inter-State complaints. No Immediate Solution to Asian Standards In Asia there is not yet an Asian Charter or Convention on Human Rights which sets our human rights standards. There is no regional human rights commission that serves as a mechanism for the study, promotion and monitoring of human rights in the Asian region. There is no human rights court or other agency for the enforcement of human rights in the Asian region. Asia includes nearly 50 States showing much more cultural and religious diversity than the States in the continent of Europe, the two Americas or the African continent. There is not in Asia a single regional inter-governmental organisation, unlike the Council of Europe, the OAS or the OAU. In fact, there are several different inter-governmental organisations within Asia, formed at different times, mostly at sub-regional levels, for diverse purposes. Some examples are the South East Asian Treaty Organisation (SEATO), the Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) and the more recently formed South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC). In the words of Professor Yash Ghai of Hong Kong, the heterogeneous nature of the peoples of Asia have been described thus: "All the world's major religions are represented in Asia and are in one place or another State religions (or enjoy comparable status: Christianity in the Philippines, Islam in Malaysia, Hinduism in Nepal and Buddhism in Sri Lanka and Thailand). To this list we may add political ideologies like socialism, democracy or feudalism which animate peoples and governments in the region. "Even apart from religious differences, there are other factors which have produced a rich diversity of cultures. A culture, moreover, is not static, and many accounts given of Asian culture are probably true of an age long ago. Nor are the economic circumstances of all the Asian countries similar. Japan, Singapore and Hong Kong are among the world's most prosperous countries while there is grinding poverty in Bangladesh, India and the Philippines. The economic and political systems in Asia likewise show a remarkable diversity, ranging from semi-feudal kingdoms in Kuwait and Saudi Arabia, through military dictatorships in Burma and Cambodia, effective one-party regimes in Singapore and Indonesia, Communist regimes in China and Vietnam, ambiguous democracies in Malaysia and Sri Lanka, to well-established democracies like India. There are similarly differences in their economic systems, ranging from tribal subsistence economies in parts of Indonesia through high developed market economies of Singapore, Hong Kong and Taiwan and the mixed economy model of India to the planned economies of China and Vietnam. Perceptions of human rights are undoubtedly reflective of these conditions and suggest that they would vary from country to country." At the same time, other jurists have observed several traditions and backgrounds common, if not to the Asian region as a whole, at least to different sub-regions in Asia. Dr. Jayawickrema has observed: " there are in Asia threads that can yet be gathered; foundations of freedom upon which it may still be possible to build. The first is a tradition of legalism that stretches from the Indian sub-continent, through Sri Lanka and Malaysia, to the Philippines. Long experience with colonial legal systems has given these countries a strong legal profession, a relatively independent judiciary and an ability to utilise the judicial process to assert and vindicate individual freedom. The second is the existing constitutional framework of several countries in the region, such as Hong Kong, India, Kiribati, Nauru, Nepal, Papua New Guinea, the Philippines, Republic of Korea, Solomon Islands, Sri Lanka, Tonga, Tuvalu and Vanuatu; a justiciable bill of rights is an integral part of each national constitution. The third is the fact that within Asia, there are sub-regional clusters of States that have already ratified the two International Covenants and thereby demonstrated a willingness to submit to the emerging human rights regime and its monitoring procedures. These include Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon, Syrian Arab Republic and Yemen in the west; India, Nepal and Sri Lanka in the south; Cambodia, the Democratic Peoples' Republic of Korea, Japan, Hong Kong, Mongolia, Philippines, Republic of Korea and Vietnam in the east; and of course, Australia and New Zealand. The fourth is an abiding spiritual heritage based upon the tenets of the four principal religions of the world which sprang forth from the soil of Asia - Hinduism, Christianity, Buddhism and Islam." Due to the vast diversities in terms of the cultural, religious, political and economic traditions among the numerous peoples of Asia, certain Asian questions relating to human rights standards do not seem to permit of solutions in the near future. For example, do the blasphemy laws of Pakistan, which impose severe criminal punishment including the death penalty for speaking against religion, offend human rights standards? Again, do certain forms of criminal punishment to which criminals are subjected under laws now enforced in certain Asian countries, such as the amputation of limbs, violate human rights standards? Perhaps similar questions can be raised on different forms of child labour in the South Asian region. Need to Live Up to Common Minimum Standards At the same time, there are the basic or first generation human rights which even in the midst of the vast diversities in the Asian continent will admit of little doubt throughout the continent. The human rights enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights are of universal application and together with the human rights declared in the two International Covenants must find a place in any regional or sub-regional standard of human rights in any part of the world. In dealing with human rights at a regional or sub-regional level, it must be stressed that human rights are valid universally for all mankind in all parts of the world, that they are interdependent and indivisible. The content of human rights does not vary from region or sub-region to another. It has to be emphasised that a regional mechanism for Asia is being advocated, not because the content or concept of human rights as enshrined in the International Bill of Human Rights is inapplicable in whole or in part in this region. It is because we in Asia wish to ourselves restate those same universal and inalienable human rights and to remind ourselves of the common standards of human decency and minimum standards of acceptable conduct towards other human beings, and to be better able to live up to those minimum standards. We want to have an Asian body to give a better account of ourselves periodically and to have an Asian judicial body functioning in this region to enforce those minimum standards. We want our own regional body to better promote, protect, propagate and monitor human rights in our countries, instead of leaving those functions to the U.N. systems which are functioning worldwide. As far as regional mechanisms for the promotion, protection, study and monitoring human rights in the Asian region are concerned, there will be less controversy. Moreover, provision can be made for States to decide as to what extent they wish to participate in the working of these mechanisms, and whether they wish to submit the jurisdiction of an Asian Human Rights Commission or an Asian Court of Human Rights, and under what conditions. An Asian Human Rights Charter should therefore be a top priority because in the midst of vast diversity we continue to believe in common minimum standards of conduct, in keeping with the notion of the brotherhood of man that all men are born free and equal in dignity and rights and that they are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood. This is especially so because over half the population in Asia is considered to be living in abject poverty, below acceptable living standards for human beings, often deprived of a family and a home, and because man's inhumanity to man is so vividly to be seen in massacres and mass murders of human being, in the ever-increasing number of persons who are involuntarily removed and disappear and in the ever-increasing number of persons who are subjected to arbitrary action, to torture and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment by the establishment. Efforts to Proclaim an Asian Regime Apart from the Vienna Declaration which called for regional arrangements for the promotion, protection and enforcement of human rights, Asian assemblies have called for the proclamation of an Asian Human Rights Charter. LAWASIA, the foremost association of lawyers in the Asia Pacific region, held its law conference in Colombo, Sri Lanka, in September 1993. It was unanimously resolved at this conference that "a Human Rights Commission and/or Court of Justice be set up in the LAWASIA region on the lines of the European Commission or Court." Shortly before that, at the SAARC LAW Conference, a meeting of lawyers of Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka held in Colombo, the proposal for the setting up of a Regional Court of Justice for Human Rights was unanimously approved. A similar proposal was made by the then Attorney General of Pakistan, Fakruddin G. Ibrahim, at the third SAARC LAW Conference held in New Delhi, India. A regional arrangement for human rights in Asia operating outside the U.N. system must have to be supported entirely by the States in this region. Without State-sponsorship it will not be a reality. In the absence of a single regional inter-governmental organisation in Asia, an inter-governmental meeting at ministerial level will have to be held, perhaps preceded by one or more seminars for Asia by the United Nations Programme of Advisory Services in the Field of Human Rights. Asian Instrument on Refugees Another arrangement that the Asian region sadly lacks is a regional treaty on refugees. The existing international instruments for the protection of refugees are the Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees of 1951 and the Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees of 1967. Several South East Asian countries have been "producing" refugees. During the past decade or so, individuals have been fleeing from Vietnam, Burma, Afghanistan, Cambodia, Laos, Indonesia, Bhutan, China (including Tibet) and Sri Lanka, and they have been asking for asylum in the territories where they land. The most prominent refugee problem has been the plight of the Vietnamese who have been fleeing their country since 1979. India has hosted some 120,000 Sri Lankan Tamils who fled conflict and violence in their country. In Thailand, 300,000 of Cambodians, thousands of Laotians and some Burmese nationals have been granted temporary asylum since 1970. In spite of the colossal nature of the refugee problem in Asia, only a handful of States in this region have acceded to the Convention or the Protocol. They are China, Japan, Philippines, Australia, Fiji, New Zealand, Papua New Guinea, Samoa and Tuvalu. In some of these countries there are problems in implementing the Convention because they have not established refugee status determination procedures. Other Asian countries which have not acceded to the Convention are reluctant to do so for fear that they would be taking over unnecessary burdens. However, under Article 14 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, "everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution." Despite the lack of a legal basis for it, South East Asian countries "receiving" refugees have by and large satisfactorily handled the refugee problems in the sub-region. Responding to the problem of the Vietnamese refugees, the "receiving" countries, namely Hong Kong, Indonesia, Japan, Malaysia, the Philippines and Thailand, developed a multilateral response called the Comprehensive Plan of Action. Those countries have granted temporary refuge under the plan to over one million Vietnamese. In keeping with basic human rights recognised by the International Bill of Human Rights, there is today a real and pressing need for a legal basis to solve the Asian refugee problem. This can be done by an Asian instrument on refugees that must be acceded to by the greater majority of the States in the Asian region. ----------------------------------------- THE END ------------------------------------------ From appasec at tm.net.my Thu Nov 5 03:42:14 1998 From: appasec at tm.net.my (appasec) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1998 02:42:14 +0800 Subject: [asia-apec 848] Solve the sugar crisis, junk Apec (fwd) Message-ID: <002201be0824$7cd91940$0100a8c0@tmnet.tm.net.my> >FORWARDED MAIL ------- >From: kmp@mail.info.com.ph >Date: 04 Nov 98 > >Kilusang Magbubukid ng Pilipinas >(Peasant Movement of the Philippines) > >NEWS RELEASE >3 November 1998 >For immediate release > >Farmers hit solons' grandstanding for Anwar Ibrahim > >JUNK TRADE LIB AND APEC TO STOP=20 >SUGAR WOES - - KMP > >"IF President Estrada wants to make his attendance to the APEC summit in >Kuala Lumpur meaningful, he must first ease the sufferings of the Filipino >farmers and consumers." > > The challenge was hurled before Estrada by the militant peasant movement >Kilusang Magbubukid ng Pilipinas (KMP) in calling for the solution to the >crisis in local sugar production and trading. KMP demanded the Malaca=F1ang >to junk the neoliberal economic and agricultural policies of import >liberalization, deregulation and privatization imposed by the Asia-Pacific >Economic Cooperation..=20 > > Reacting to reports of anomalous hoarding of sugar by cartel traders and >the doubling of retail prices with alleged connivance of the Sugar >Regulatory Authority, KMP chairman Rafael Mariano said that the government >intentionally implemented simultaneous actions and policies that tied the >local market more to the vagaries of the international market, at the >expense of local consumers. > > Mariano averred that the SRA is merely one of the many tools monopolists >take advantage of when news and fears of a global shortage makes favorable >their blatant manipulation of sugar prices and supplies, like with rice >shortages. "It is merely one of the consequences of the government's >anti-poor and anti-people liberalization policy, in blind compliance with >its committments to the General Agreements on Tariffs and Trade - World >Trade Organization (GATT-WTO), the APEC and the Asean Free Trade >Agreement," Mariano said.=20 > > "Despite strong opposition from peasants and small food producers, the >Agricultural Tariffication Act was passed by Congress to make market rules >supposedly fair and competitive for small farmers," he added. "Instead, it >is feeding a vicious cycle where the big comprador-landlords, with tie-ups >to big foreign agro-corporations, gained huge profits to buy up ever larger >areas of plantations from small planters, then to evict the peasants and >farmworkers from CARP-covered sugarlands, thus completing the monopoly's >grip over the entire sugar industry." > > According to the National Federation of Sugar Workers (NFSW), sugarlords >owning above 50 hectares comprise only 4% of the total number of sugar >planters, but control 78.6% of more than 500,000 hectares, of which only >375,000 are presently planted to cane, the rest lying idle for future >bonanzas or temporarily planted to other crops. NFSW claims that the 9,000 >hectares in Negros awarded its members under CARP were repossessed violently >by hacienderos.=20 > > The comprador-landlords found it more profitable to import finished sugar >for which they have a monopoly in distribution and pricing,explaining why >the cartel has lobbied President Estrada to request Congress to approve the >additional import of 154,000 metric tons, way over the 45,000 allowed by the >Act, rather than modernize their operations.=20 > > In 1996, then president Ramos issued Memorandum 358, allowing them to >import duty-free as much as 125% of their export commitments to the United >States. Acquired duty-free at US$0.10 per pound, the sugar was resold to the >US at US$0.22 per pound. The overzealous buying spree by the big players >that year caused a glut in local supplies, which further drove small >planters into bankruptcy, while the consuming public were still made to pay >high retail prices. > > Early last year, local wholesale prices fell from 750 to 450 pesos per >50-kilo bag when imported sugar flooded the market. The KMP said >sugarlord-traders passed the burden of falling prices to 556,000 farmworkers >in Negros and Luzon who lost jobs or worked for little or no pay. Also >threatened by the collapse of the local sugar trade are the 36,000 >industrial jobs at the sugar centrals.=20 > > The KMP says the myth that "free trade" fostered by "globalization" levels >the playing field is utterly exposed in this setup of the sugar industry, >where monopoly control over land and trading in an industry already >strangled by a few is intensified.=20 > > In other developments, the families of peasant leaders who have been >languishing in Camp Crame for a year now criticized the lawmakers out for >publicity who flew to Kuala Lumpur purportedly to act as part of an >international watchdog team to assure a fair trial for Anwar Ibrahim but are >blind to widespread human rights violations in their own country. > > "Just like Estrada, they are after grandstanding for celebrities, but they >have not lifted a single finger for our husbands and children who have been >jailed, kidnapped, tortured and killed by the military because we simply >fought for our lands," cried Cora, wife of Lito Matricio, a peasant leader >from Mindoro.=20 > > Matricio and five other peasants were implicated together with former >representative Jose Villarosa in the murders of the Quintos brothers in >Mamburao last year. Mrs. Matricio said that Congress continues to ignore the >pleas of victims human rights violations who are demanding the halt to the >killing spree of military forces in Palawan and South Quezon=20 > >- 30 - > > From jaggi at vcn.bc.ca Thu Nov 5 04:37:10 1998 From: jaggi at vcn.bc.ca (Jaggi Singh) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 1998 11:37:10 -0800 (PST) Subject: [asia-apec 849] more sprAyPEC documents Message-ID: MORE DOCUMENTS FROM DFAIT (posted November 4th, 1998) * Peter Donolo and "bottomline benefits for business" * "Spooking the markets" * Chretien and Suharto * Overshadowing Human Rights * The Mining Connection * Parwoto and Edwards * More on Appeasing Suharto * Later this month, Prime Minister Jean Chretien will be attending the APEC Summit in Malaysia. Some of the excerpts from these new documents at the RCMP Public Complaints Commission (PCC) will hopefully draw some attention to the broader corporate globalization agenda of APEC which continues unabated. From the outset, complainants at the PCC have consistently and tirelessly requested documents relating to APEC 1997 from all relevant government agencies and departments. It has been a slow process, and document disclosure is still far from complete (and may never be). Below are some excerpts from new Department of Foreign Affairs (DFAIT) documents recently provided to the PCC. DFAIT, along with the Canadian Security and Intelligence Service (CSIS), the RCMP, the Prime Minister's Office (PMO), the Privy Council Office (PCO) and the Department of National Defence, are now claiming "privileges" for the many parts of documents that they have censored. The City of Vancouver has yet to comply with document disclosure, almost one month after their documents were first requested by complainants. An analysis of the censored documents, and why most (if not all) should be made public, will be forthcoming at a future date. As it stands, three unrepresented complainants to the PCC -- Megan Hunter, Jonathan Oppenheim and Jaggi Singh -- have already made an application to the Federal Court of Canada to challenge the censoring of government documents submitted to the PCC. The seven-member team of federal government lawyers have stated that they will oppose any attempt to reveal any more than what they have deemed to be relevant to date. Scanned copies of most of the following excerpts can be accessed on the APEC ALERT webpage: . For more info on these documents, contact either Jonathan (604-224-2482, jono@physics.ubc.ca) or Jaggi (514-526-8946, jaggi@vcn.bc.ca). All the following excerpts are from the binder titled "Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade (DFAIT) and Privy Council Office (Volume 2)." The binder is marked "Exhibit 26A" for the purposes of the PCC (for all you document diehards). I) Peter Donolo and "bottomline benefits for business" The following excerpts, relating to the views of the Prime Minister's Press Secretary, Peter Donolo, are quite revealing. Donolo took an active role in planning for APEC as part of the APEC/CYAP (Canada's Year of the Asia-Pacific) Communications Committee which he chaired: "Peter Donolo was quite cautious on DFAIT's idea of broadening the APEC dialogue into matters beyond trade and economic development, as he was concerned that such activities will take away from the central APEC message of trade liberalization." "You will note Peter's [Donolo] concerns that the People's Summit physically take place away from the meetings of Leaders (it will)." (-- From a confidential "Memorandum for Jim Bartlemann" [of the Privy Council Office] prepared by Neil Reeder. Dated July 11, 1997. Tab 94.) "Donolo was more cautious on the issue of broadening the APEC dialogue and reaching out to non-business sectors. ... The focus, he says, will have to remain squarely on liberalization and bottomline benefits for business." "This led to a broader discussion on the plans for the Peoples' Summit. As with widening the Leaders' dialogue, Donolo is cautious about anything which may cause discomfort to the PM's guests. ... Donolo is particularly anxious that the People's Summit event remain physically separate from the APEC meetings." (-- From a memo by James Lambert of DFAIT, the basis of the confidential "Memorandum for Jim Bartlemann" of July 11, 1997. Tab 94.) As early as July 1997, Donolo was putting a stop to even tepid attempts to broaden APEC to include human rights and concerns. Furthermore, Donolo wanted to make sure that the People's Summit, a moderate effort by NGOs to address broader issues, not be located anywhere near the AELM (perhaps illicit talk of human rights would reach the Leaders by osmosis). It seems that the Chretien government's appeasement of Suharto is just one manifestation of the government's broader appeasement of big business and the "PM's guests", all at the expense of the concerns of even the moderate elements of civil society embodied by the People’s Summit on APEC. II) "Spooking the markets" "[O]fficials are working to ensure that, under your Chairmanship, the Vancouver meeting is seen to be responsive to the situation as possible without "spooking the markets." [-- From a secret "Memorandum for the Prime Minister" prepared by Len Edwards, APEC Senior Officials' Meeting Chair, dated November 10, 1997. Tab 96.] "[C]rises still occur, primarily because countries exercise their sovereign rights and are selective about the advice they will follow ... until the market exercises its own discipline, and until the IMF imposes conditions in exchange for financial assistance. In a globalized world, bad policies have no place to hide." [-- From "Financial Market Stability and APEC", part of a secret "Memorandum for the Prime Minister", dated November 10, 1997. Tab 96.] Apparently, the so-called "financial crisis" is the result of pesky governments exercising their "sovereign rights." The reference to "selective advice" is interesting. Agreeing with IMF demands (dictated by the interests of big capital) is seemingly prudent, while following the advice of, say, the populations that governments are supposed to serve in the first place just results in "bad policies". These excerpts are a classic statement of the economic fundamentalism to which the Canadian government uncritically adheres. The powerful leaders of APEC are seemingly impotent before the altar of the almighty "market". There's no reason to expect any better when the APEC Leaders get together for another reunion (without Suharto this time) later this month in Malaysia. III) Talking with Suharto [All the following quotes are from the secret "Briefing Book for the Right Honourable Jean Chretien, Prime Minister of Canada" relating to "Bilateral Meeting with President Soeharto of Indonesia." "Talking Points" dated November 24-25, 1997. Tab 97.] "I am pleased that, as APEC's senior statesman, you have come to Vancouver." "The Government of Canada has taken every possible measure to assure security and to ensure that your reception in this country is in keeping with the high traditions of Canadian hospitality." Recently, in the House of Commons, Chretien has tried to defend the government's pandering to Suharto by claiming that the feds funded the People's Summit. Well, while meeting Suharto, his talking points also included the following: "The People's Summit is not an APEC event." "The Government of Canada has not funded the attendance of overseas participants at the People's Summit." "My government had no role in the mock trials recently held across Canada by certain non-governmental activists." "The use of our Parliament buildings for one of these was not sanctioned by the Government, but was arranged by an opposition Member of Parliament." For Chretien's reference, his briefing book also contains a biography of Suharto. The whitewashed bio includes a reference to Suharto's bloody coup of 1965. The briefers write, "His decisiveness in handling the confusing situation that ensued was an important factor in foiling the coup and restoring order." What the document neglects to mention is that in restoring order, Suharto initiated the massacre of between 500,000 to one million people (according to Amnesty International). IV) Overshadowing Human Rights "The success of the Vancouver meeting will be judged by whether it produces a credible outcome in advancing APEC's target for regional trade and investment liberalization. ... Human rights and labour practices in the region will attract public attention, largely because of the People's Summit. However, this will likely be overshadowed in the media by the attention paid to the activities of the Leaders." [-- From the secret "Briefing Book for the Right Honourable Jean Chretien, Prime Minister of Canada" relating to "Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation Fifth Leaders' Meeting." Dated November 24-25, 1997. Tab 98.] Chretien's communications people (led by Peter Donolo) seemed quite confident that the so-called side issues (human rights, the environment, indigenous rights, labour practices, women, poverty and others) discussed at the People's Summit would be overshadowed by the attention paid to the leaders and their activities. Perhaps the mainstream media can judge for themselves whether puff pieces on the leaders (and their spouses) overshadowed more substantive coverage of APEC. V) The Mining Connection The following excerpt shows that the Indonesian government was trying to connect Suharto's concerns about demonstrations to Canada's significant mining interests in Indonesia: "Firstly, on the security aspect ... As you may be aware that during the held (sic) of AELM, there will be demonstration by a group called ETAN (East Timor Alert Network) targetting the Indonesian President. We now (sic) that such activities will humiliate our Head of State, and for us this action will hurt the Republic of Indonesia. So in this regard, I would like to have your sincere attention to avoid this thing happened (sic). I would also like to inform you that the demonstration will be led by Ramos Horta, the Leader of the Timorese People anti integration to Indonesia. Secondly about our Mining cooperation ... Your Excellency, You really aware that Indonesia has so many investors from Canada particularly in mining sector and we are very supportive and welcome to all Canadian investments in this area to Indonesia. We expect that the business cooperation can be used as a vehicle to strengthen the relation between our two countries." [-- From the speaking points of Indonesian Mining Minister Sudjana, given to Canadian Energy, Mines and Natural Resources Minister Ralph Goodale at the APEC Energy Ministers' Meeting in Edmonton. Dated August 26, 1997. Tab 99.] It is rather unusual for an Indonesian Mining Minister to bring up Suharto's security and embarrassment concerns, if not to subtly threaten repercussions against Canada's mining interests. It's fair to assume that making sure Suharto was content was part of a broader strategy by the federal government to make sure that Canada's mining companies operating in Indonesia were content. Those companies have been widely criticized internationally for their complicity in human rights abuses, the displacement of indigenous peoples and environmental devastation in Indonesia. Moreover, it is widely acknowledged that Canadian mining companies were known to pay off the army and Suharto's cronies, helping to prolong Suharto's despotic rule over Indonesia. The Indonesian Minister's notes above were forwarded to a Paul Sadler, with the following cover note by Catherine McKenna, an aide to Minister Goodale: "As you will read from the notes, most important point [underlined in original] was message to be relayed to Axworthy and Prime Minister from Indonesian President that they are upset about the actions of ETAN and security aspect of AELM. This was emphasized at the beginning of the meeting and reemphasized at the end. Goodale said that he would report to MINA (Axworthy) and PMO their concerns." [-- From Fax Sheet by Catherine McKenna to Paul Sadler. Tab 99.] It would be in early September, not too long after the APEC Energy Meeting in Edmonton, that DFAIT, the PMO and the Embassy in Indonesia would work overtime to ensure Suharto's presence in Vancouver, and make sure his reception in Canada was in keeping with "the high traditions of Canadian hospitality." One more excerpt about the mining connection: "MINING: We are most pleased that the Mining Seminar in Jakarta was a success. We look forward to the imminent approval of the 7th Generation Contracts of Work, the majority of which involve Canadian firms." [-- From the secret "Briefing Book for the Right Honourable Jean Chretien, Prime Minister of Canada" relating to "Bilateral Meeting with President Soeharto of Indonesia." Dated November 24-25, 1997. Tab 97.] This is one of the "Talking Points" of Chretien's bilateral meeting with Suharto on November 24, 1997 (more excerpts above). Contracts of Work are needed for Canadian mining companies to begin operations in Indonesia. Apparently, Chretien has reason to expect their "imminent approval." Any connection to appeasing Suharto's desire not to see demonstrations? Perhaps Chretien can answer that question, along with a few more, if he is ever subpoenaed to appear at the Public Complaints Commission. VI) Parwoto and Edwards "Ambassador Parwoto [Indonesian Ambassador to Canada] came directly to the point, asking if Canada "could do something to re-arrange the People's Summit", alluding to Canadian government involvement in the arrangements which he suggested should give us leverage. ... While the Canadian government was conducting ongoing discussions with constructive elements among the organizers, which we hoped would be helpful to vent steam, we were in no position to intervene regarding venues or timing." [-- From "Indonesian Ambassador Parwoto meeting with MLE/MMB" sent by "HERWI, Momeo". Dated September 1, 1997. Tab 102.] The prescient Peter Donolo seems to have been thinking like an Indonesian diplomat all along (see excerpts above) as he made sure that the People's Summit was physically separate from the Leader's Summit back in July. "MLE [Special Envoy Len Edwards] responded that Canada had unparalleled experience in conducting such Summit-style events. Security would be meticulous and impenetrable. Demonstrations would take place at designated sites within the legally sanctioned parameters, and measures were in place to ensure physical separation between demonstrators and leaders. Worst-case scenarios would of course be anticipated. MLE recalled the "march on leaders" from the Toronto G-7 Summit in 1998 which had been effectively and peacefully contained." "Parwoto welcomed the latter visit [ie. a proposed visit by Len Edwards to Jakarta to beg Suharto to come to APEC] and suggested that MLE should meet with Senior Intelligence Official, [name vetted]." [-- From "Indonesian Ambassador Parwoto meeting with MLE/MMB" sent by "HERWI, Momeo". Dated September 1, 1997. Tab 102.] There is no indication whether Edwards agreed to meet the Senior Intelligence Official from Indonesia as recommended by Parwoto. VII) More on Appeasing Suharto The following excerpts from an "Action Memorandum" for Lloyd Axworthy are prefaced by the remarks, "Minister agrees with the recommendations." "ISSUE: To agree to a strategic approach to engage Indonesian Ministers and President Soeharto in responding to concerns about their potential embarrassment to their Leader at the time of the Vancouver APEC Economic Leaders' Meeting." "1. That you agree to the initiation of a series of interventions with Indonesian Ministers and President Soeharto to assure them that all precautions will be taken regarding physical security and crowd control; 2. That with regard to the People's Summit, you agree to make clear that: ... b) we can agree that Canadian Ministers will deal only with those elements of the People's Summit which are relevant to APEC." The premise of Canada's so-called "constructive engagement" position vis-a-vis Indonesia is that Canada can exercise a positive influence on Indonesia. This action memorandum begs the question, "Who's influencing who?" The memorandum also has a section titled "Proposed Contacts with Indonesia." In addition to letters to Indonesian Foreign Minister Ali Alatas and Suharto (in which Axworthy goes on to apologize for the actions of Canadian human rights groups), a meeting with Benjamin Parwoto (Indonesian Ambassador to Canada) and a telephone call to Suharto are proposed for the Prime Minister. To date, there is no document record of these meetings and calls. [-- From "Action Memorandum for: The Minister of Foreign Affairs" written by Len Edwards. Dated September 19, 1997. Tab 103.] [end] From appasec at tm.net.my Thu Nov 5 10:54:58 1998 From: appasec at tm.net.my (appasec) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1998 09:54:58 +0800 Subject: [asia-apec 850] Programme for APPA Message-ID: <000a01be085f$58b49ea0$0100a8c0@tmnet.tm.net.my> Hi everyone, This is the most up-to-date programme of APPA. For security reasons, the names of the speakers are not included. Thank you for your understanding. The Secretariat --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Program for Asia Pacific Peoples Assembly (APPA) November 7-15 1998 YOUTH AND STUDENTS FORUM 7-9 November 1998 Venue: Stanford Hotel 07TH November 1998 Saturday Ice Breakers 0900 - 1100 - Registration 1100 - 1300 - Ice breakers 1400 - 1500 - Keynote Address 2000 - 2300 - Video 08TH November 1998 Sunday 0900 - 1030 - Session 1 - Education Topic: The impact of the Globalisation to education Speaker from the Philippines 1100 - 1230 - Forum/Workshop 1400 - 1530 - Session 2 Livelihood Case study : country report ( Malaysia, Thailand, Philippines, New Zealand, Nepal ) 1600 - 1800 - Session 2 - Livelihood 09TH November 1998 Monday 0900 - 1030 - Session 3 Human Rights Topic: Confronting Globalisation, Reasserting Human Rights Speaker from Indonesia 1100 - 1230 - Forum/Workshop 1400 - 1530 - Action Planning 2000 - 2200 - Malam kebudayaan ( Cultural Night ) 2. 3rd INTERNATIONAL WOMEN'S CONFERENCE AGAINST APEC 8-9 November 1998 Venue: Grand Olympic Hotel PT6,Jalan Hang Jebat, KL Day 1 9.00 a.m. Welcome 9.30 a.m. Opening Plenary: (speakers from Malaysia and India) - street drama / action and songs 10.45 a.m. Plenary session: Women?s Struggle Against Globalisation - Forum of the Poor, Thailand - Wheat Revival Movement ? Korean Farmers Women Association - Philippine Campaign against Imperialist Globalisation - Migration- Solidaritas Perempuan - Women and the Pro-democracy Movement in Indonesia - Revivalism, Fundamentalism, Communalism and Violence Against Women 12.30 p.m. Open Forum 1.00 p.m. Lunch 2.30 p.m. Simultaneous Workshops - Labour and Migration - Trafficking & Violence Against Women - Land, Food Security & Sustainable Agriculture - Indigenous Women - Health, Privatisation and Reproductive Rights - Strategies, Gains and Challenges for Women - UN Instruments Day 2 9 a.m. Workshop Reporting and Open Forum 2.00 p.m. Showing Off Junk APEC 25- minute video documentary 2.30 p.m. Plenary and Synthesis 5.00 p.m. Closing and Cultural Event 10 November 1998 Opening and Registration Venue: Federal Hotel 9 a.m. ? 3.00 p.m. Registration 3.00 p.m. ? 4p.m. Tea reception 4 p.m. - 4.20 p.m. Welcome Speech Speakers to be announced later Speakers to be announced later 4.20 p.m. ? 4.50 p.m. Indigenous Ritual Ceremony 4.50 p.m. ? 5.00 p.m. Poetry recital 5.00 p.m. ? 6.00 p.m. Keynote Address: Globalisation and Resistance: Reigniting the Pro-Democratic Struggle in Indonesia Speakers: 2-3 speakers from Indonesia 6.30p.m. ? 8.00 p.m. Opening Dinner 8.00p.m. ? 10.00p.m. Discussion on Trade and Investment Liberalisation Speakers from Mexico Speakers: South Korea 3. EDUCATION FORUM Theme: CONFORNTING GLOBALISATION: REASSERTING CHILDREN?S RIGHTS TO UNIVERSAL FREE PUBLIC EDUCATION Venue: Federal Hotel, Kuala Lumpur Organisers: Education International 9.30 a.m. Opening - welcome by the Malaysian El affiliates - remarks by the EIAP Chairman Regional Committee 10.00 a.m. Theme 1 ?Literacy Situation in the Region, Seven Years After Jomiten? El Deputy General Secretary Questions and Answers 11.00 a.m. Coffee break 11.30 a.m. Theme 2 ?The Asian Economic Crisis and Its Consequences for Education? El Vice President Questions and Answers 13.00 p.m. Lunch 14.30 p.m. Working Groups Group 1: Theme 3: ?Is Public Education Adapted to Countries in the Context of the?? Globalisation of the Economy Group No: 2: Theme 4 ? Trade Union Strategies to Improve access and Quality Education? 1600 Coffee break 1630 Reports of the Working Groups 1700 Presentation and Discussion of a Draft Resolution 1800 Closing November 11 & 12 Simultaneous issue forums 4. PRIVATISATION AND FINANCIAL DEREGULATION Venue: Ritz Garden Hotel Program 9.30am Keynote address: Fifteen Months of Economic Crisis and Political Turmoil: the Way Forward Speaker from the Philippines 10.30 TEA 10.45 Government, Civil Society and the Retrenchment of the Public Sector: Privatization of Healthcare and Social Service. a) Physicians for a National Health Program, USA b) Citizens Health Initiative, Malaysia c) Dr K Balasubramaniam, Consumers International d) Dr Peter Botsman, University of Western Sydney Chair from International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War (IPPNW) 12.30pm LUNCH 1.45 pm Privatization of Public Amenities and Education a) University of New South Wales b) Education International c) IBON d) Courage, Philippines 3.15pm TEA 3.30pm Workshop 6.00pm End of first day Day 2 9am IMF Domination and Peoples? Response a) Chulalongkorn University b) Not available c) PICIS, South Korea 10.30am TEA 10.45pm Towards an Alternative International Financial Architecture a) University of Malaya b) Third World Network c) Left Business Observer 12.30pm LUNCH 1.45pm The Future of the State and Civil Society in the Era of Privatization and Financial Deregulation a) University of Manchaster b) Malaysian Trade Union Congress c) International Movement for a Just World 3.15pm TEA 3.30pm Workshop 5.30pm Adoption of Resolution. 5. HUMAN RIGHTS AND DEMOCRACY Dates 9, 11 & 12 November 1998 Venue: Federal Hotel Day 1 Human Rights in Malaysia (Overview for Foreign Participants) 10.30 a.m. Greetings and Welcome 10.45 a.m. Introduction of participants 11.00 a.m. Presentation: Malaysia?s Struggle for Human Rights 11.30 a.m. The Current Crisis in Malaysia 12.30 p.m. Lunch 2.00 p.m. Briefing on Human Rights Forum 4.00 p.m. Close Day 2 The Human Rights Situation in the Asia Pacific and Globalisation 9 .00 a.m. Introduction 9.30 a.m. Panel Discussion: Impact of Globalisation on Peoples? Rights Case Studies: Indonesia, South Korea and Peru 11.00 a.m. Tea break 11.30 a.m. Workshop: Country Reports 1.30 p.m. Lunch 2.30 p.m. Plenary Discussion: - sharing of workshop results - synthesis 4.00 p.m. Tea 4.30 p.m. Presntations: UDHR and Globalisation ? Are these compatible? 6.00 p.m. Close Day 3 The Peoples Struggle for Human Rights 9.00 a.m. Developments Since the Vienna Conference - Common Initiatives in Asia Speakers: (to be confirmed) - American (North and Latin ) experiences Speakers: (to be confirmed) 11.00 a.m. tea break 11.30 A.m. Workshop: National and Regional Strategies to Promote and Protect Human Rights 1.00p.m. Lunch 2.00p.m. Plenary discussion: Affirmation of Current Strategies and Development of New Strategies to Defend Human Rights 4.00 p.m. Tea break 4.30 p.m. Resolutions 6. 00 p.m. Close 6. US-Japan Militarist Agenda Venue: Capitol Hotel Program Day1 8:00- 9:00 Additional Registration 9:00- 9:30 Keynote Speech: Globalization and the US-Japan Militarist Agenda 9:30-11:00* Country Sharing on US-Japan Militarist Alliance - United States: US Security Strategy for Asia in the 21st Century - Japan: Its Own Security Agenda for Asia - China: Is She a Regional Threat? Proposed Speaker from Labor Rights Association, Taiwan 11:00-11:30 Break 11:30-12:30 - Philippines: Visiting Forces Agreement - the Return of US Military Forces - Indonesia: US-Indonesia Arms Deal Proposed Speaker from the YMB network 12:30- 1:30 Lunch 1:30- 2:30* - Korea: A Country Still Divided by U.S. Military Bases Speaker from the National Council for Independent and Peaceful Reunification of Korea 2:30- 3:30 Open Forum 3:30- 4:30* Sharing on Peoples' Struggles Against US-Japan Militarist Agenda A Broad Coalition Campaign Against U.S. Military Bases in Okinawa Citizens' Campaign Against U.S. Bases and the Deployment of SDFs Abroad 4:30- 5:00 Break 5:00- 7:30 - USA - Philippines Junk VFA Movement - Indonesia : YMB Network - Taiwan 7:30- 8:30 Dinner Day 2 9:00- 9:15 Recap 9:15-10:00 - Korea: Minjung Movement for Peace and Reunification in Korea 10:00-10:30 Break 10:30-11:30 Asia-wide Campaign 11:30- 1:00 Lunch 1:00- 2:00 Open Forum 2:00- 3:00 Resolutions 3:00- 3:30 Break 3:30- 4:00 Resolutions 4:00- 5:00 Planning 5:00- 6:00 Closing 7. LABOUR Date: 9, 11 & 12 November Venue: Century Hotel (to be confirmed) Program Day 1 Exposure (9 November) Factory Visit and exchange with trade unions and labour activists in Malaysia Half-day visit Electronic factory: Harris Semiconductor Automobile factory in Klang Valley Day 1 (October 11) 9.00 am Opening speech: Presentation: ?Key trends of the workers? movement in the Asia-Pacific region? 10.30 am Tea break 11.00 am Workshop will be divided into 4 groups: 1. Women workers ?Sahabat Wanita 2. Trade unions ? NUTEAW 3. Community and non-formal sector 4. Labour supporting services AMRC/LRC Each workshop will discuss what are impacts of globalisation on respective sectors and how to defend workers? rights and employment 11.00 am Workshop: Reflection and evaluation of the present situation (problems, difficulties and opportunities) 1.00 pm Lunch 2.00 pm Workshop (continued): Discussion on demands to put forward and strategy 4.00 pm Report back and plenary 5.30 pm Close 8.00 pm Videos and informal discussion Day 2 (October 12) 9.00 am Inputs: Presentation: experiences of existing struggles (some case presentations of Asia and Latin America) 10.30 am Tea break 11.00 am Workshop on ways of: - Forging solidarity between different sector - Developing common programs 1.00 pm Lunch 2.00 pm Summary and plenary 3.30 pm Tea break 4.00 pm Evaluation of previous cooperation and common program (how to prevent duplication of tasks and avoid repetition of mistakes) 5.00 pm Resolution 8.00 pm Solidarity night 8. MIGRANT LABOUR Venue: Stanford Hotel Program Day 1 9.00 a.m. ? 9.30 a.m. Opening ceremony & Introductions 9.30 a.m. ? 11.00 a.m. Plenary Overview ? Globalisation : Implications and Challenges for Migrant Workers 11.00 a.m. ? 11.30 a.m. Break 11.30 a.m. ? 1.00 p.m. Experiences in Responding to the Challenges for Migrant Workers With Regards to Globalisation 2.30 p.m. ? 6.00 p.m. Workshops 1-3 will be held as parallel workshops Workshop 1 The Crisis of Rights for Migrant Workers and Their Families Speakers: Tenaganita ? Malaysia AMC ? Hong Kong Workshop 2 Globalisation and the Quality of Life of Migrants and their Families Speakers: ? Cambodia Sri Lanka Japan Workshop 3 Resisting Globalisation Through Migrant Empowerment Chair: Mayan Villalba Speakers: Bangladesh Korea Bjen Molina ? Hong Kong Day 2 9.00 a.m. Game 9.30 a.m. Reporting on Workshop Discussion 12.00 p.m. Discussion and Consolidation of Common Points / Recommendations 2.00 p.m. Declaration 3.30 p.m. Break 4.00 p.m. Facilitators Launching of Migrant Rights Campaign Press Conference Closing ceremony ? Outside venue of migrant forum, KL 9. URBAN POOR Venue: Chubadak Village Day 1 9.00 am Opening remarks: 9.00 a.m : Visit to squatter settlement in Kuala Lumpur 12.30 p.m : Lunch break 2.00 - 2.30 p.m : Introduction : "The impact of globalisation and APEC to squatters and urban poor" ? from Philippines 2.30 ? 3.15 p.m.: Presentation : "Problems of squatters and squatter evictions in Malaysia" ? (to be confirmed) 4.00 p.m : Sharing experience of squatters in forced eviction 5.00 p.m : Video show on "Eviction in Action" Day 2 9.00 a.m : Presentation: Peoples responses and strategies to resist involuntary displacement: Thailand 10.00 a.m. Tea break 10.30 a.m : Workshop discussions on strategies and action plans 11.30 a.m. Presentations of workshop groups 1 .00 p.m : Lunch break 2.00 p.m : Presentation of workshop groups (continue) 3.00 p.m : Planning regional activities 4.00 p.m : Resolution 8.00 p.m : Solidarity night. 10. Indigenous Peoples November 12 only Venue: (to be confirmed) 8.30 a.m. Registration 9.30 a.m. Ritual - Dayak elders Introduction of delegates Cultural presentation ? Sarawak Cultural Group 10.00 a.m. Welcoming Address 10.15 a.m. Plenary - Globalisation: Impact and Implications on Indigenous Peoples in Indonesia - Globalisation and Indigenous Peoples of the Philippines - Impact of globalisation on indigenous peoples in Malaysia Borneo Resource Institute (BRIMAS) - Globalisation and the Response of the Indigenous Peoples in Papua New Guinea. 12.30 p.m. Lunch 5.00 p.m. Roundtable discussion / workshops 3.00 p.m. Reportings 4.00 p.m. Forum Resolution Closing remarks Dayak Song & Dance by Sarawak Cultural Group. 11. ENVIRONMENT AND FORESTRY YMCA , Kuala Lumpur Forests and Trade on the Pacific Rim: How Do We Protect Our Communities? Day 1 9:00 WELCOME 9:30 PRESENTATION: Free Trade in Forests: What does it mean for ecosystems and communities in Pacific Rim countries? 10:00 UPDATES: Case Studies which show how trade and multinational corporations are impacting forests and communities Malaysia Chile New Zealand Japan U.S. Pacific Northwest Russian Far East Philippines Mexico Indonesia 12:00 QUESTIONS AND DISCUSSION: What are the problems with globalization? How can we impact consumer behavior? What tools and skills do we need to deal with problems? What questions do we need to answer at workshop? 13:00 LUNCH 14:00 PRESENTATION: How do citizens in different countries confront globalization differently and how can we work together using our various strategies? (Case studies: Japan, Malaysia, Chile, USA) 15:00 DISCUSSION 16:00 EXPLORING STRATEGIES: SMALL GROUP BREAKOUT ONE Awareness/|Education Campaigns Mobilising Communities Corporations Import/Export Bans and Controls Policy Alternatives Responsible Trade Tools Consumer Campaigns/Certification More 17:30 REVIEW DISCUSSION, SET PRIORITIES FOR TOMORROW Day 2 9:00 UPDATES: Presentations on current initiatives and campaigns to confront globalization of forest industry and trade and investment initiatives such as APEC, NAFTA and FTAA, IMF, WTO 10:30 DISCUSSION: Ways to build networks, collaborate and join up on campaigns, identify campaigns 11:30 EXPLORING STRATEGIES: SMALL GROUP BREAKOUT TWO Awareness/|Education Campaigns Mobilising Communities Corporations Import/Export Bans and Controls Policy Alternatives Responsible Trade Tools Consumer Campaigns/Certification More 13:00 LUNCH 14:00 DISCUSSION: Where Do We Go From Here? Developing Joint-strategies and Plans for Collaboration 15:00 PRESENTATION: Logistical considerations for joint-campaigns and network-building 16:00 DISCUSSION: Working out Logistics 17:30 CLOSING 12. COMMUNITY LIVELIHOOD Day 1 08.00 - 09.00 : Registration of invited guests 09.00 -10.00 : Briefing, Introductions and opening 10.00 - 10.30 : Break 10.30 - 12.30 : Plenary 1 : Development and the Crisis to Sustainable Livelihood Speakers: International Movement For A Just World (JUST Asian Resource Foundation, Thailand 14.00 : Lunch Break 14.00 - 15.30 : Workshop on the plenary theme and action proposals. 15.30 - 16.00 : Break 16.00 - 17.00 : Presentation of Workshop Reports Day 2 8.00 - 10.00 : Plenary 2 : Community Enterprises An Option For Sustainable Livelihood Speakers Sustainable Development Network, Malaysia E.M. Haryadi. Director for Development Bina Swadaya, Indonesia ANGOC 10.00 - 10.30 : Break 10.30 - 12.30 : Workshop on plenary theme and action proposal 12.30 - 14.00 : Lunch Break 14.00 - 15.0 0 : Presentation of Workshop Reports 15.00 - 15.30 : Break 15.30 - 16.30 : Building Consensus for common action 13. LAND, FOOD SECURITY, AND AGRICULTURE 8:30-9:30 Registration 9:30-10:15 Opening Plenary Overview of Globalisation and its Impacts on Food Security and Agriculture Issues Research Foundation for Science, Technology and Natural Resource Policy, India Sarojeni V. Rengam Pesticide Action Network- Asia and the Pacific, Malaysia 10:15- 11:15 Overview of Trade Agreements The WTO and Agriculture UK The Impacts of NAFTA on Agriculture and Food Security 11:15-13:00 3. Reports from Grassroots Movements: Country Specific Mexico Philippines Thailand Malaysia Korea 13:00-14:00 Lunch 14:00-18:00 Workshops: -Land -Aquatic Resources -Trade Agreements -Transnational Corporations -Grassroots Resistance and Alternatives Day2 9:00-10:40 ReportsfromWorkshops 10:40-13:00 DevelopmentofSharedAnalysis 13:00:14:00 Lunch 14:00-16:00 Development of Shared Analysis (continued) and Adoption of Final Statement 16:00-18:00 Common Action (to be announced) 14. GLOBALISATION AND CHILDREN Day 1 9.00 a.m. Opening 9.30 a.m. Introduction, release exercise / games, expectation check, orientation, workshop guidelines and attitude setting 11.00 a.m. Country specific situations (drawing exercises, story telling, map making, group discussion, singing) 1.00 p.m. Lunch 2.00 p.m. Development and Underdevelopment of Countries, Colonization and re- colonization, global crisis (games, discussions, puzzles, story-telling, role play) 4.30 p.m. break End Day 2 9.00 a.m. Instruments of globalisation, the story of APEC (skit, discussion, map making, modelling) 11.00 a.m. tea break 11.30 a.m. Drafting resolutions 1.0 p.m. Lunch 2.00p.m. Adoption of unity statement (work by child artists and writers) 3.30 p.m. Design, rehersal and other preparations for theatre production 4.30 p.m. tea break 5.00p.m. Assessment and feedback session November 13 & 14 Program for Plenary PLENARY - Day 1 9.00 a.m. - 9.30 a.m. Opening Remarks and Introduction of Plenary Process By Chairperson 9.30 a.m. - 9.50 a.m. Presentation of Resoultions Privatisation and Financial Deregulation 9.50 a.m. - 10.20 a.m. Open Forum 10.20 a.m. - 10.45 a.m. Tea break Songs / presentations 11.00 a.m. - 11.45 a.m. Presentation of resolutions Human Rights and Democracy US-Japan Militarist Agenda 11.45 a.m. ? 12.45 p.m. Open Forum 12.45 p.m. ? 2.00 p.m. Lunch Songs / presentations 2.15 p.m. - 3.15 p.m. Presentation of resolutions Labour Urban Poor Migrant workers 3.15 p.m. - 4.30 p.m. Open forum 4.30 p.m.- 5.00 p.m. Tea Break Songs / presentation 5.00 p.m. - 6.00 p.m. Presentation of resolutions Women Student & Youth Children 6.00 p.m. ? 7.00p.m. Open forum 7.00 p.m. End 14 November 1998 Day 2 9.00 a.m. - 10.30 a.m. Community Livelihood Environment & Forestry Songs / presentation Indigenous People Food Security 10.30 a.m. - 11.00 a.m. Tea break Songs and presentation 11.00 a.m. - 1 .00 p.m. Open Forum 1.00 p.m. - 2.00 p.m. Lunch 2.00 p.m. - 4.00 p.m. Presenting draft and finalisng declaration / unity statement 4.00 p.m. - 4.30 p.m. Tea break Songs and presentation 4.30 p.m. - 5.30 p.m. Passing and adopting of final declaration 5.30 p.m. - 6.00 p.m. Closing ceremony 6.00 p.m. Closing of Assembly 8.00 p.m.- 12 m'nite 50th Anniversary of UDHR concert November 15 9 a.m. ? 10.30 a.m. Preparation for mass event 11.30 a.m. Mass event 2 p.m. ? 6p.m. Migrant Solidarity Evening --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Peoples Festival '98 THE PROGRAMME SUBTITLES, SUBPLOTS AND SUB-VERS-IVES 8-12th Nov 8pm onwards A sub-festival film, poetry & performances @ Filmnet Caf? - 183, Jalan Ampang, 50450 Kuala Lumpur All screenings are free. Entry by invitation only. Sunday 8th Nov @ 8 pm : THE STRUGGLE FOR DEMOCRACY Documentary : THERE IS ONLY ONE WORD: RESIST Indonesia (30min), Indonesian with English subtitles Performance by Sukania Venugopal on the theme of a woman finding her independence through dance [20 min] Short :LOVE ME TENDER Malaysia 1996, 6 min Feature : MOVING THE MOUNTAIN China 1997, English Monday 9th Nov @ 8 pm : BREAKING SILENCES Documentary : SACRIFICE Burma/USA/Canada 1998, 50min, Burmese/English, English subtitles Performance by Aida Redza [15 min] Short : ORACION Cuba 1963, 7min Feature : SCENT OF A GREEN PAPAYA Vietnam 1994, 1'45min, Vietnamese with English subtitles Tuesday 10th Nov @ 8 pm : OBJECTS OF TRANSACTIONS Documentary : ISLANDS OF FIRE (Indonesia) 30min, Indonesian Readings of Latin America Poets by Eddin Khoo Short : TRANSIT YEARS Australia/Malaysia , 4 min Feature: THE BURNING SEASON Drama, USA 1994, 119min, English Wednesday 11th Nov @ 8 pm : STARTING PERCEPTIONS Documentary : NO CHILDHOOD AT ALL Burma, 30min, Burmese, English subtitles Performance on children's issues Feature : WHITE BALLOON Iran 1995,1'25, Iranian with English subtitles Thursday 12th Nov @ 9pm : RESILIENCE Performance in commemoration of the Dili massacre in East Timor. Short : PUNITIVE DAMAGES New Zealand/Malaysia, 7 mins Feature : FOUR DAYS IN SEPTEMBER Brazil 1998, 101 min, Portuguese, English subtitles THE FESTIVAL VILLAGE The Asia Pacific Peoples' Assembly's Cultural Village 13-14th Nov @ The Federal Hotel Sky Room and Conference Foyer Highlights: Exhibition of sculptures, installation and photos, Workshops on film, popular education and theatre, Bazaar with merchandise and handicrafts from local and international organisations, Activities like performances, graffiti, face painting, hair wraps and lots more. HUMAN RIGHTS CONCERT In commemoration of the 50th Anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. 14th Nov @ Federal Hotel Ballroom, 8.30-11pm Highlights: Performances "1974" by Aida Redza, Indian classical dance by the Temple of Fine Arts, monologue by Mary George, international performers etc Poetry Readings by Kee Thuan Chye, Eddin Khoo, Charlene Rajendran and lots more. Organisers : The Peoples' Fest Kultcha.Kom Enquiries : Tel: 016 225 0194/Fax: 03-283 3536/ Email: peoplesfest@hotmail.com From appasec at tm.net.my Thu Nov 5 11:39:18 1998 From: appasec at tm.net.my (appasec) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1998 10:39:18 +0800 Subject: [asia-apec 851] Canadian Government Announces Support for APPA Message-ID: <001e01be0866$134aace0$0100a8c0@tmnet.tm.net.my> November 4, 1998 (2:15 p.m. EST) No. 254 CANADA ANNOUNCES CONTRIBUTION TO ASIA-PACIFIC PEOPLES' ASSEMBLY AND INTERNATIONAL MEDIA PROJECT Foreign Affairs Minister Lloyd Axworthy and International Trade Minister Sergio Marchi today announced a Canadian contribution of $50 000 to fund the Asia-Pacific Peoples' Assembly (APPA)and a forum co-hosted by the Institute for Media, Policy and Civil Society (IMPACS) during the upcoming 1998 APEC Leaders Meeting in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. The 1998 Asia-Pacific Peoples' Assembly (APPA) is a conference of non-governmental organizations to be held from November 10 to 15 in advance of the APEC Leaders Meeting, November 16 to 18. The Vancouver-based IMPACS will co-host with the Malaysian-based Asian Institute for Development Communications (AIDCOM) the first meeting of the International Monitoring Group (IMG) on Trade and Media on November 13. "As a significant gathering of groups interested in good governance, human rights and the rule of law, I look forward to the success of the APPA and the IMG meeting," said Mr. Axworthy. "Canada is dedicated to furthering discussions on various mechanisms to engage in formal consultation and dialogue with civil society throughout Asia-Pacific." More than 300 participants from the Asia-Pacific region are expected to attend APPA. This year's assembly will address the impact of the current financial crisis on the Asian and other economies, and review progress on civil society issues on the occasion of the 50th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. International Trade Minister Marchi commended the organizers of the Peoples' Assembly. "It is vital that citizens interested in the opportunities and challenges of trade and investment liberalization express their views and provide their advice to governments." The IMG meeting will review the state of free media within APEC, monitor the impact of trade liberalization on media, and brief media and APEC officials on recommendations to advance free media in the region. The Canadian contribution of $25 000 to APPA is for documentation expenses including publications, flyers and registration packages, while the $25 000 allocated to IMPACS is to offset costs associated with the co-ordination of the IMG meeting. In addition, CIDA provided $60 000 to support an international conference on the engagement of civil society in the APEC process, held on October 5 in Malaysia. Leaders from 21 Pacific Rim economies will meet from November 16 to 18 in Kuala Lumpur for the sixth APEC Economic Leaders Meeting. The leaders meeting will be preceded on November 14 and 15 by the tenth meeting of APEC ministers responsible for international trade and for foreign affairs, which Minister Axworthy and Minister Marchi will attend. Both meetings will include participation, for the first time, of three new APEC members: Peru, Russia, and Vietnam. Funding for this contribution was provided for in the February 1998 federal budget and is therefore built into the existing fiscal framework. - 30 - For further information, media representatives may contact: Debora Brown Office of the Minister of Foreign Affairs (613) 995-1851 Leslie Swartman Office of the Minister for International Trade (613) 992-7332 Media Relations Office Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade (613) 995-1874 ? Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade, 1998 From appasec at tm.net.my Thu Nov 5 11:43:15 1998 From: appasec at tm.net.my (appasec) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1998 10:43:15 +0800 Subject: [asia-apec 852] Statement From the Secretariat in Response to Announcement from the Government of Canada Message-ID: <001f01be0866$19bdad20$0100a8c0@tmnet.tm.net.my> STATEMENT FROM THE SECRETARIAT: (November 5, 1998, Kuala Lumpur) The Government of Canada announces its support of the Asia-Pacific Peoples? Assembly On November 4, 1998, the Government of Canada made a public declaration of support for the Asia-Pacific Peoples? Assembly (APPA). On November 2, the APPA secretariat had received confirmation from the Canada Fund in Malaysia, a branch of the Canadian International Development Agency, of C$25,000 in support of the APPA secretariat. The declaration of support and the authorization of funding come from the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade and the highest levels of Canadian government. We would like to acknowledge the role that international solidarity plays in influencing government policy. The decision of the Canadian government to support the Peoples? Assembly comes after years of lobbying and activism from Canadian people to oppose APEC?s agenda and undemocratic operations. We believe that such strong support of APPA would not have occurred without the hard work of Canadian civil society. The support from the Government and people of Canada is most welcome. It represents their affirmation of the importance of civil society and the necessity of open discussion to the decision-making process, specifically with international trade and investment issues. With the Government of Canada?s stated support, we are confident that it will give serious attention to APPA?s recommendations and analysis and that it will urge other APEC governments to do likewise. We hope that other APEC government leaders will follow the Canadian initiative and assert publicly their support of APPA and the vital role it plays as an open forum for discussion about APEC and globalisation. From oppenh at theory.physics.ubc.ca Thu Nov 5 12:32:29 1998 From: oppenh at theory.physics.ubc.ca (Jonathan Oppenheim) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 1998 19:32:29 -0800 (PST) Subject: [asia-apec 853] Re: Canadian Government Announces Support for APPA Message-ID: <199811050332.TAA21846@theory.physics.ubc.ca> What a load of crap ----- Begin Included Message ----- >From owner-asia-apec@mail.jca.ax.apc.org Wed Nov 4 18:49:20 1998 What a load of crap. We're supposed to thank them for throwing us spare change?? This release from the Canadian Gov't should make us retch. The guilt money allows them to pretend they give a shit about what civil society thinks, while at the same time they go behind our backs and sell us out. After APEC 97, the Canadian Gov't used the money they gave to the People's Summit (about the same amount of money they spent on building an atrium for the Leaders' Luncheon) to tell Canadians that they cared about the environment, human rights, and labour conditions. Meanwhile, they did everything in their power to ensure that none of these issues would actually get discussed during the APEC Summit. They insisted that the money they gave could not be used to bring in foreign speakers like Ramos-Horta, and did their utmost to ensure that the People's Summit would be a non-event. Anyone who doubts this should check out the latest set of documents on the APEC Alert web page (http://www.cs.ubc.ca/spider/fuller/apec_alert) -------------------------------------------------------- November 4, 1998 (2:15 p.m. EST) No. 254 CANADA ANNOUNCES CONTRIBUTION TO ASIA-PACIFIC PEOPLES' ASSEMBLY AND INTERNATIONAL MEDIA PROJECT Foreign Affairs Minister Lloyd Axworthy and International Trade Minister Sergio Marchi today announced a Canadian contribution of $50 000 to fund the Asia-Pacific Peoples' Assembly (APPA)and a forum co-hosted by the Institute for Media, Policy and Civil Society (IMPACS) during the upcoming 1998 APEC Leaders Meeting in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. The 1998 Asia-Pacific Peoples' Assembly (APPA) is a conference of non-governmental organizations to be held from November 10 to 15 in advance of the APEC Leaders Meeting, November 16 to 18. The Vancouver-based IMPACS will co-host with the Malaysian-based Asian Institute for Development Communications (AIDCOM) the first meeting of the International Monitoring Group (IMG) on Trade and Media on November 13. "As a significant gathering of groups interested in good governance, human rights and the rule of law, I look forward to the success of the APPA and the IMG meeting," said Mr. Axworthy. "Canada is dedicated to furthering discussions on various mechanisms to engage in formal consultation and dialogue with civil society throughout Asia-Pacific." More than 300 participants from the Asia-Pacific region are expected to attend APPA. This year's assembly will address the impact of the current financial crisis on the Asian and other economies, and review progress on civil society issues on the occasion of the 50th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. International Trade Minister Marchi commended the organizers of the Peoples' Assembly. "It is vital that citizens interested in the opportunities and challenges of trade and investment liberalization express their views and provide their advice to governments." The IMG meeting will review the state of free media within APEC, monitor the impact of trade liberalization on media, and brief media and APEC officials on recommendations to advance free media in the region. The Canadian contribution of $25 000 to APPA is for documentation expenses including publications, flyers and registration packages, while the $25 000 allocated to IMPACS is to offset costs associated with the co-ordination of the IMG meeting. In addition, CIDA provided $60 000 to support an international conference on the engagement of civil society in the APEC process, held on October 5 in Malaysia. Leaders from 21 Pacific Rim economies will meet from November 16 to 18 in Kuala Lumpur for the sixth APEC Economic Leaders Meeting. The leaders meeting will be preceded on November 14 and 15 by the tenth meeting of APEC ministers responsible for international trade and for foreign affairs, which Minister Axworthy and Minister Marchi will attend. Both meetings will include participation, for the first time, of three new APEC members: Peru, Russia, and Vietnam. Funding for this contribution was provided for in the February 1998 federal budget and is therefore built into the existing fiscal framework. - 30 - For further information, media representatives may contact: Debora Brown Office of the Minister of Foreign Affairs (613) 995-1851 Leslie Swartman Office of the Minister for International Trade (613) 992-7332 Media Relations Office Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade (613) 995-1874 © Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade, 1998 ----- End Included Message ----- From appasec at tm.net.my Thu Nov 5 14:52:00 1998 From: appasec at tm.net.my (appasec) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1998 13:52:00 +0800 Subject: [asia-apec 854] Revised Statement from APPA: Canadian government announces support of APPA Message-ID: <19981105055752.BDSX1251@wingate.tm.net.my> (Listserv members: our deepest apologies for the revision. The wrong text file was inserted. The following is the statement we have sent to the press. You are welcome to forward it to others that are interested. Please disregard the earlier statement.) STATEMENT FROM THE ASIA-PACIFIC PEOPLES' ASSEMBLY ORGANISING COMMITTEE: The Government of Canada announces its support of the Asia-Pacific Peoples? Assembly On November 4, 1998, the Government of Canada made a public declaration of support for the Asia-Pacific Peoples? Assembly (APPA). On November 2, the APPA secretariat had received confirmation from the Canada Fund in Malaysia, a branch of the Canadian International Development Agency, of C$25,000 in support of the APPA secretariat. The declaration of support and the authorization of funding come from the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade and the highest levels of Canadian government. We would like to acknowledge the role that international solidarity plays in influencing government policy. The decision of the Canadian government to support the Peoples? Assembly comes after years of lobbying and activism from Canadian people to oppose APEC?s agenda and undemocratic operations. We believe that such strong support of APPA would not have occurred without the hard work of Canadian civil society. The support from the Government and people of Canada is most welcome. It represents the affirmation of the Canadian people of the importance of civil society and the necessity of open discussion to the decision-making process, specifically with international trade and investment issues. With the Government of Canada?s stated support, we are confident that it will give serious attention to APPA?s recommendations and analysis and that it will urge other APEC governments to do likewise. We hope that other APEC government leaders will follow the Canadian initiative and assert publicly their support of APPA and the vital role it plays as an open forum for discussion about APEC and globalisation. From ppc at philonline.com Thu Nov 5 15:03:47 1998 From: ppc at philonline.com (ppc) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1998 14:03:47 +0800 Subject: [asia-apec 855] Final invitation to BAYAN-AWC Roundtable Discussion Message-ID: <199811050603.OAA22604@fiesta.philonline.com.ph> Final Announcement and Invitation BAYAN (New Patriotic Alliance) and the Asia-Wide Campaign (AWC) invite you to a roundtable discussion on the US-Japan Militarist Agenda in the Asia-Pacific with the theme: Iron Fists Shield Globalization from Peoples' Resistance. This forum will be held on the first two days, November 11-12, of the Asia-Pacific Peoples' Assembly (APPA) being convened parallel to the APEC Leaders Summit to be held in Kuala Lumpur this November. Asia-Pacific Peoples' Assembly (APPA) November 10-15, 1998 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia Federal Hotel 35 Jalan Bukit Bintang, 55100 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Tel: 603-248 9166 Fax: 603-248 2877 Roundtable Discussion:US-Japan Militarist Agenda in the Asia-Pacific (Iron Fists Shield Globalization from Peoples' Resistance) November 11 - 12, 1998 Rationale Globalization, trumpeted as the inexorable integration of the vastly disparate economies of the advanced capitalist countries and the backward, pre-industrial Third World nations into a single prosperous world economy, has unraveled and become exposed as a false messiah. Instead, the policies of liberalization, deregulation and privatization are now widely seen as delivering deathblows to the crisis-ridden economies of underdeveloped countries and the so-called newly industrializing countries (NICs). The results for oppressed peoples in the Third World are now plain to see: bankruptcies of domestic industries; workers thrown out of their jobs or forced to accept slave wages; peasants displaced from the land and driven to penury by so-called development projects and export-driven land conversions; massive migration of the rural poor to cities only to become jobless slum dwellers; the commerce of women and children in sweat shops and in a burgeoning flesh trade; the exploitation and abuse of migrant labor. Working people in industrialized countries are not spared as international capital seeks to invest and set up shop where labor costs are the lowest and trade unions are non-existent or ineffectual. Resurgent mass protests, uprisings and national liberation struggles are the peoples? response to severe economic hardships brought about by the neoliberal economic policies of globalization. In Asia-Pacific, the US and its junior partner Japan, have been most active in pushing globalization to the desperately poor, underdeveloped countries. Along with other power centers of monopoly capital, they unite in making the latter comply with GATT-WTO, IMF-World Bank and APEC impositions with the collusion of domestic rulers in every country. They also vigorously compete with each other for markets and resources, expanding and consolidating their strategic spheres of influence. In a 1995 US Defense Department policy paper the following assessment was made: ?The Asia Pacific region is currently the most economically dynamic region in the world, and on that basis alone, its security would be critical to America?s future.? US trade with Asia grew twice that of trade with Europe accounting for 36% of total American world trade providing for more than 3 million American jobs and contributing over $400 billion annually to the US economy. Seventy percent of the regional demand for oil is met by US-owned or controlled wells in the Persian Gulf with the precious commodity passing through narrow choke points in Southeast Asia. Forty percent of global bank reserves are reported to be under the control of seven East Asian economies. Japan has accelerated the relocation of its assembly and sub-assembly type of manufacturing in East Asia to establish a regional division of labor comprising the NICs, China and ASEAN members. Japanese monopoly capitalists are taking advantage of the region?s rich natural resource base, huge market, and cheap labor together with generous government incentives. It is not surprising that from 1991-1993, the rate of profit for Japanese firms in Asia was 2.4%, more than four times that in Japan. Thus the high economic stakes of Japanese monopoly capital in the region corresponds to the highest priority Japan, in alliance with the US, gives to regional security concerns. The current financial and economic crisis which saw the crash of East Asian economies including that of Japan, the collapse of the Russian economy, and now threatening the Chinese and Latin American economies, only underscores the importance for the US and Japan of securing their immense interests in the region. In order to protect these interests and to suppress peoples' movements challenging them, the US and Japan flex their military might and intervene covertly and overtly in the internal affairs of countries in the region. Despite being the sole superpower in the world today, the US maintains 100,000 forward deployment troops in main military bases and facilities in Alaska, Hawaii, Japan, Korea, Guam and Saipan, Singapore and Diego Garcia. Post-world war II military treaties concluded by the US with Japan, South Korea, the Philippines, Thailand and others are the cornerstone of US military hegemony in the region. Other Asian countries without US bases are covered by Accessing and Cross Servicing Agreements (ACSA) which provide unhampered sea/air ports usage and supply arrangements. Since the US-Japan Security Treaty was signed in 1952, Japan has been providing logistical and financial support for US troops stationed in the region. In exchange, Japanese big business interests are protected under the US military umbrella. In reasserting its economic, political and military hegemony, US imperialism demands more support from Japan. The Japanese ruling class assents because of its own militarist agenda aimed at protecting and expanding its capital overseas in the face of worsening economic and political crisis in the region. Thus the US and Japan have strengthened their security alliance and stepped up their joint military activities. In April 1996, the two governments issued the Joint Declaration on Security - Alliance for the 21st Century which widens the scope of their defense cooperation in regional and even global military adventures. US and Japan also concluded an ACSA which allows Japanese self-defense forces (SDF) to provide greater logistical support to the US military. In November the same year, Japan mobilized 11 warships, 130 aircraft and 10,000 soldiers in a joint military exercise with the US Seventh Fleet which coincided with US-South Korea war games clearly directed against North Korea. In September 1997, the two governments revised the 1978 Guideline for US-Japan Security Cooperation which provides for joint military operations in wartime. The new guidelines provide for military cooperation in times of emergencies in surrounding areas of Japan to include the Korean Peninsula, the Taiwan Strait and Southeast Asian countries like Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines and Burma. It is in this context that the roundtable discussion, ?Globalization and the US-Japan MilitaristAgenda? is being held at the Asia-Pacific Peoples? Assembly. The US-Japan militarist alliance continues to be the real source of destabilization and insecurity in East Asia as well as the rest of the Asia-Pacific. These imperialist powers have for a long time used our region as their battleground, resulting in the loss of countless lives, widespread destruction of homes and properties, unspeakable suffering and a legacy of socio-economic ills for generations to come. Peace-loving peoples of the Asia-Pacific must oppose the US and Japanese imperialists? aggressive militarist and interventionist designs in the region. Objectives To deepen our understanding of the US-Japan Security Agreement and its role in imperialist globalization which has intensified the economic and political crisis in the Asia-Pacific region; To learn about the joint security strategy employed by the US and Japan in realizing their militarist agenda in the Asia Pacific region; To share and learn from the people's struggles in the region to counter covert and overt US and Japanese aggression to protect their economic and political interests; and To pinpoint urgent issues related to the US-Japan Security Agreement which can be the basis for regional peoples' action. Revised Programme: III. Program November 10 Whole Day: Registration to APPA Afternoon: Registration to Roundtable Discussion on Globalization and the US-Japan Militarist Agenda Early Evening: APPA Opening Ceremony November 11 Morning Session 8:00- 9:00 Additional Registration 9:00- 9:30 Keynote Speech: Globalization and the US-Japan Militarist Agenda Speaker: Capt. Dan Vizmanos, former President, BAYAN 9:30-11:00* Country Sharing on US-Japan Militarist Alliance - United States: US Security Strategy for Asia in the 21st Century Speaker: American Friends Service Committee - Japan: Its Own Security Agenda for Asia Speaker: Mr. Saito, AWC Japan - China: Is She a Regional Threat? Proposed Speaker from Labor Rights Association, Taiwan 11:00-11:30 Break 11:30-12:30 - Philippines: Visiting Forces Agreement - the Return of US Military Forces Speaker: Dr. Carol Araullo, Vice-Chairperson, BAYAN - Indonesia: US-Indonesia Arms Deal Proposed Speaker from the YMB network 12:30- 1:30 Lunch Afternoon and Evening Session 1:30- 2:30* - Korea: A Country Still Divided by U.S. Military Bases Speaker from the National Council for Independent and Peaceful Reunification of Korea 2:30- 3:30 Open Forum 3:30- 4:30* Sharing on Peoples' Struggles Against US-Japan Militarist Agenda - Japan Mr. Koshiro and Mr. Shiramatsu A Broad Coalition Campaign Against U.S. Military Bases in Okinawa Citizens' Campaign Against U.S. Bases and the Deployment of SDFs Abroad 4:30- 5:00 Break 5:00- 7:30 - USA - Philippines Junk VFA Movement Ms. Rita Baua, BAYAN - Indonesia : YMB Network - Taiwan 7:30- 8:30 Dinner November 12 Morning session 9:00- 9:15 Recap 9:15-10:00 - Korea: Minjung Movement for Peace and Reunification in Korea 10:00-10:30 Break 10:30-11:30 Asia-wide Campaign 11:30- 1:00 Lunch 1:00- 2:00 Open Forum 2:00- 3:00 Resolutions 3:00- 3:30 Break 3:30- 4:00 Resolutions 4:00- 5:00 Planning 5:00- 6:00 Closing * Time alloted for translation From parc at jca.ax.apc.org Thu Nov 5 22:37:34 1998 From: parc at jca.ax.apc.org (Pacific Asia Resource Center) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1998 22:37:34 +0900 (JST) Subject: [asia-apec 856] Re: Canadian Government Announces Support for APPA In-Reply-To: <001e01be0866$134aace0$0100a8c0@tmnet.tm.net.my> Message-ID: <199811051337.WAA20850@mail.jca.ax.apc.org> Dear Secretariate, could you send me your mail to this address as soon as possible? ito asahi ?????????????101-0052 ????????????2-1?????F TEL 03-3291-5901 FAX 03-3292-2437 e-mail:parc@jca.ax.apc.org http://www.jca.ax.apc.org/parc Pacific Asia resource Center(PARC) 3F, Hinoki Bldg., 2-1 Kanda Ogawa-cho, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo, Japan 101-0052 TEL +81-3-3291-5901 FAX +81-3-3292-2437 parc@jca.ax.apc.org, http://www.jca.ax.apc.org/parc From panap at panap.po.my Thu Nov 5 20:29:00 1998 From: panap at panap.po.my (PAN Asia Pacific) Date: Thu, 05 Nov 1998 20:29:00 Subject: [asia-apec 857] Confronting Globalization Asserting Our Right to Food! Message-ID: <3104@panap.po.my> Dear friends, Please note that there are changes for for Forum on Land, Food Security and Agriculture programmes, 11 - 12th November 1998. Confronting Globalization Asserting Our Right to Food! Forum on Land, Food Security and Agriculture 11 - 12th November 1998 PROGRAMME at a glance DAY 1 (November 11) 8:30-9:30 Registration Opening Plenary 9:30-10:15 Overview of Globalisation and its Impacts on Food Security and Agriculture Issues Speakers: Vandana Shiva (Research Foundation for Science, Technology, and Natural Resource Policy, India) Sarojeni V. Rengam (Pesticide Action Network- Asia and the Pacific, Malaysia) 10:15 - 10:30 TEA BREAK 10:30 - 11:15 Overview of Trade Agreements The WTO and Agriculture (Mika Iba, NESFFE) The Impacts of NAFTA on Agriculture and Food Security (Ana de Ita, CECCAM, Mexico) 11:15-1:00 Reports from Grassroots Movements: Country Specific. Mexico, Philippines,Thailand, Malaysia, South Korea, 1:00-2:00 LUNCH 2:00-6:00 Workshops: - Land Issues and Resources - Aquatic Resources - Trade Agreements - Transnational Corporations - Grassroots Resistance and Alternatives 7:30 DINNER DAY 2 (November 12) Closing Plenary 09:00 - 10:40 Reports from Workshops 10.40 - 10:45 Presentation by AMIHAN and KMP representatives 10:45 - 11:00 TEA BREAK 11:00 - 1:00 Development of Shared Analysis 1:00 - 2:00 LUNCH 2:00 - 4:00 Adoption of Final Statement 4:00 - 4:15 TEA BREAK 4:15 - 6:00 Common Action 7:30 DINNER 8:30 Cultural Event From appasec at tm.net.my Fri Nov 6 02:33:24 1998 From: appasec at tm.net.my (appasec) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1998 01:33:24 +0800 Subject: [asia-apec 858] Do Away with APEC! Message-ID: <004d01be08e2$66c266c0$0100a8c0@tmnet.tm.net.my> Pambansang Lakas ng Mamamalakaya ng Pilipinas (Pamalakaya- Pilipinas) [National Federation of Fisherfolk Organizations of the Philippines] 18 Mabuhay St., Bgy. Central, Quezon City * Telefax: 434-38-36 Nationwide Coalition of Fisherfolk for Aquatic Reform (Nacfar) 69 Maayusin St., UP Village, Quezon City * Telefax: 920-58-24 =========================================================== Press Release November 5, 1998 DO AWAY WITH APEC 1998, Militant Fishers Tell Estrada ! In a scheduled press conference today, fishers belonging to Pamalakaya and Nacfar urged President Estrada TO DO AWAY WITH APEC 1998! Rodolfo Sambajon, Pamalakaya national chair, said that ?after six summit meetings, the APEC?s twin policies of liberalization and deregulation has not solved the problems besetting Philippine fisheries. Instead, APEC-inspired opening of the fisheries economy to foreign investors and local comprador-landlords worsened the problem of overfishing, and subjected the Asian economy to the stranglehold of monopoly capital in crisis.? Sambajon said that ?Japanese and US dominated-APEC pried open local fishing economies for systematic plunder through standardized export-orientation and calibrated import-dependence, thus resulting in the stockpiling of multimillion trade deficits temporarily cured by IMF-WB structural adjustment loans.? Pamalakaya revealed that the current financial crisis also affects and reflects the fishery crisis. ?Due to the crisis of overfishing primarily by capitalist economies, their actual production dwindled by 10.3 million tons in just five years and had relied on imports, that they now consume 85 percent of the world imports, 30 percent of which was taken solely by Japan,? Sambajon voiced. Pamalakaya added that ?by committing further to APEC policies, the Philippines gives away vital fishery resources to monopoly capitalists who represent only one percent or some 35,000 fishing vessels of the world?s global industrialized fleets, but greedily consumes one-half and two thirds of all marine landings? In effect, local fisherfolk and the Filipino people suffer from decreasing per capita consumption of fish, and their fishery resources ravaged due to indiscriminate conversions for unsustainable aquafarming practices just to meet export demands?, Pamalakaya?s chairman quipped. Pamalakaya and Nacfar resists imperialist-led globalization under the APEC and WTO, and shall join the upcoming anti-APEC Asia Pacific Peoples Assembly to be held in crisis-tormented Malaysia. - 30 - From samysd at HK.Super.NET Fri Nov 6 02:58:04 1998 From: samysd at HK.Super.NET (Sinapan Samydorai) Date: Fri, 06 Nov 1998 01:58:04 +0800 Subject: [asia-apec 859] THREATENED RIGHTS IN ASEAN COUNTRIES Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.19981106015804.007625ac@pop.hk.super.net> ASIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION Unit D, 7th Floor, Mongkok Commercial Centre, 16 - 16B Argyle Street, Kowloon, HONGKONG Tel: +(852) - 2698-6339 Fax: +(852) - 2698-6367 E-mail Asia-UA-Network THREATENED RIGHTS IN ASEAN COUNTRIES This article is based on the observations made by the AHRC through its many channels of data collection and particularly through many consultations it has conducted in the region. Due to the peculiar nature of the problems relating to rights impediment in the region, a more holistic approach has been adopted. While the Western States have achieved a comprehensive State-structure development with many concentrating on fine-tuning their systems, in the countries of the region the development of such structures itself remains a problem. In the world today the rights are in search of remedies. While there has been a relatively considerable progress in the economic development in some countries of the Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN), there has been no improvement in providing remedies for human rights abuse. In fact, some countries have not even ratified basic human rights instruments (see Table 1). The spread of the culture of human rights has been ideologically prevented such political doctrines as the peculiarity of Asian values. TABLE 1 Countries in Southeast Asia with their Ratification Status of ICCPR and ICESCR ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------- Country ICCPR ICCPR - First ICCPR - Second ICESCR Optional Protocol Optional ProtocoL ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------ Brunei Burma Cambodia * * Indonesia Laos Malaysia Philippines * * * Singapore Thailand Vietnam * * ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------ Right to Life "Foremost among rights is the right to life, from which flow other rights and freedoms. The right to life is not confined to mere physical or animal existence but includes the right to every limb or faculty through which life is enjoyed. It signifies the right live with basic human dignity, the right to livelihood, the right to a habitat or home, the right to education and the right to a clean and healthy environment, for without these there can be no real and effective exercise or enjoyment of the right to life. The State must also take all possible measures to prevent infant mortality, eliminate malnutrition and epidemics, and increase life expectancy through a clean and healthy environment and adequate preventive as well as curative medical facilities. It must make primary education free and compulsory." (ASIAN HUMAN RIGHTS CHARTER - A People's Charter, pp. 10 - 11.) This statement is an affirmation of the provisions in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR). The reality in ASEAN countries contrasts sharply with this objective. From the ICCPR point of view, right to life implies that no persons should be deprived of his/her life or liberty except through the due process of law. And further, the international human rights movement insists that the death penalty needs to be abolished anyway. However, the death penalty still remains in many countries. Regarding the due process of law, we will comment under the section on fair trial. Right to life also implies basic economic, social and cultural rights. Of these, the most important right is the right to food. The Indonesian Minister for Food, in a statement made in September 1998 to Parliament, has said that out of 308 regencies in Indonesia, 150 had a food shortfall, and 53 of the 150 faced a severe shortage. United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) has also stated that four million children in Indonesia are facing a serious malnutrition problem. Burma and Cambodia too face serious problems of food availability. The massive problem of prostitution in several countries including Thailand indicates grave food problems faced by the women. The economic crisis now affecting all Asian countries have caused unemployment and will lead to cuts in welfare expenditure, which in turn will aggravate the food problem. Already in south Korea there were several instances of workers committing suicide (in some cases together with their families) as the workers have lost their jobs. Added to the international financial crisis, countries face harsh measures imposed by international financial agencies for receiving aid. Thus the food issue is likely to remain a vital human rights issue in the region. Apart from the issue of food-related human rights violations, medical care and the availability of medical facilities are also issues of concern. In several countries in the region the availability of medical facilities for the rural masses and the urban poor are very scarce. In none of the countries is medical insurance a compulsory. While privatisation schemes have introduced advanced medical facilities in some countries, for example (Bangkok) Thailand, Malaysia and Singapore, the income levels of most of these countries will not allow a vast section of their populations to have the use of these medical facilities in case of serious illnesses. Indonesia, Burma, Cambodia, Laos and Vietnam are among the countries that face acute problems in these areas. Besides, the high cost of medical care in some countries is also due to the absence of a sufficient number of trained doctors. Meanwhile, the spread of HIV/AIDS is life threatening to a considerable section of the population in several countries. In Thailand and Cambodia this problem figures most prominently. In terms of the universal instruments of human rights, right to work is also a basic right. Article 7 of the ICESCR speaks of the right to just and favourable conditions of work that ensures fair wages of equal value, a decent living for workers themselves and their families, safe and healthy working conditions, equal opportunity for promotion on the basis of seniority and competence, rest leisure, reasonable limitations of working hours and periodic holidays with pay. However, this right has not being realised to a satisfactory degree in most of the countries in the region. The prevailing economic crisis is likely to make the situation worse. Some countries of this region attracted a large number of migrant workers to low-paying jobs during the last decade while others produced them. These migrant workers, of whom women constitute a very large portion, are threatened with termination of contracts and deportation due to the prevailing economic crisis. Generally, migrant workers do not enjoy any legal right in the countries in which they work. Right to Fair Trial Article 10 of the UDHR deals with the right to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal. The right to a fair trial is also linked to freedom from arbitrary arrest (Article 9 of the UDHR), the presumption of innocence until being proved guilty (Article 11 of the UDHR) and freedom from punishments under retrospective laws. These provisions are further elaborated in the ICCPR. These rights are known as due process rights and dealt with from Article 9 to Article 16 of the ICCPR. There are serious violations of the rights relating to a fair trial in almost all countries in the region. The greatest obstacle to the achievement of the provisions relating to fair trial is the "national security laws" prevailing in most countries. The ASEAN region is known for its draconian "national security laws." In fact, the notions of national security expressed in the special security laws form an important part of the conception of "Asian values" which was promulgated by several ASEAN leaders in recent decades. This particular notion regards that sacrifice of civil liberties for the purpose of pursuing economic development is legitimate. The subordination of the population to the arbitrary will of the rulers is considered to be emanating from the traditional concepts of authority and the traditional relationship between rulers and the ruled. From such philosophical premises there flows the laws relating to indefinite period of arrests, once approved by the head of the State or an authority nominated by the head of the State. In Singapore, Malaysia, Indonesia, Burma, Cambodia and Vietnam, there are still extreme provisions of law to suspend the normal safeguards relating to freedom from arrest and detention. Regarding the offences under national security laws, the need to follow the criminal investigation processes can also be suspended. In fact, the power over persons being brought under national security laws is usually transferred from the criminal investigation police to various branches of special police. The duty to bring people before the judiciary is also usually suspended regarding persons being arrested under national security laws. The usual rule of not admitting statements made under police custody as evidence does not apply under national security laws. Self-incriminating statements obtained by use of force are also not excluded under these provisions. Apart from national security laws, even the normal laws do not provide for fair trial in many countries due to either weak laws or absence of laws in this regard. The current debate in Thailand on this issue is interesting. There are many acts that are considered generally as crimes in most countries but not in Thailand due to the absence of legal definition of such crimes. In Cambodia, only 42 offences are defined as crimes. Before the promulgation of the Transitional Provision of Criminal Procedure in 1992 there were only eight crimes being recognised in Cambodia. In most countries there are no legal provisions relating to corruption, illegal logging, environmental crimes and the like. The absence of definition of crimes implies impossibility of conducting trials relating to such activities. Fair trial also implies the presence of a criminal investigation authority, which conducts investigations into crimes according to norms and standards generally accepted for such investigations. A fundamental aspect of criminal investigation is the rules relating to the post-mortem inquiries. While in a country like Cambodia, Vietnam and Laos there are no provisions for post-mortem inquires, in Burma the rules established during the colonial times have now been forgotten due to the general breakdown of the judicial process. This is also the case in Indonesia. Some countries suspend the laws relating to post-mortem inquiries during the operation of national security laws. The complete absence of forensic facilities in some other countries and inadequacy of such facilities also adversely affect the criminal investigation processes, which are the foundation of a fair trial. A well-trained police force, which enjoys the confidence of people, is an essential part of the criminal investigation process. The public perception of corruption is generally attributed to police in most countries of the region. Exceptions to some degree may be the Singaporean and Malaysian police who are better paid than those in other countries. Some countries such as Cambodia, Burma and Indonesia cease to have competent police due to the loss of traditions as a result of civil war, militarisation and grossly inadequate payments to the police. The independence of the judiciary is another essential requirement for guaranteeing the right to a fair trial. Basic principles on the independence of the judiciary endorsed by the U.N. General Assembly in December 1948 lays down the norms and standards for the realisation of judicial independence. Although Article 2 of the UDHR lays down that the judiciary should act without any restrictions, improper influences, inducements, pressures, threats or interference, direct or indirect, from any quarter for any reason, most countries in the region cannot claim to have such a situation. While more blatant form of control is exercised in some countries, in few others pressure is exercised in more political cases. All these factors contribute to the poor observance of the right to fair trial in the countries of the region. Right to Take Part in the Government of One's Country This right is guaranteed by Article 21 of the UDHR. This right includes the right to take part in the government of a person's country, directly or through freely chosen representatives; equal access to the public service; the will of the people to be the basis of authority of the government, which shall be expressed in periodic and genuine elections that shall be by universal and equal suffrage and shall be held by secret vote or by equivalent free voting procedures. This right is further elaborated in Article 25 of the ICCPR. This right is very much related to other rights guaranteed under the freedom of opinion and expression, the right of peaceful assembly and association, and the rights relating to the freedom of the press. In almost all ASEAN countries there are serious problems relating to the respect for these rights. In Indonesia, this right was virtually absent since the military take-over in 1965. The basic rule was presidential rule under the military dictatorship. In Burma, this right has ceased to exist since the military take-over in 1962 by General Ne Win. Although an election was held in 1989, the power was not handed over to the political party that received an overwhelming mandate from the Burmese people and the military has continued its rule up to now. In Cambodia, the first election was held in May 1993 but the power was not transferred to the winning party. As a result a coalition-form of government was formed. An election was again held in July 1998. However, this has not yet led to the formation of a government. The elections in Singapore have been held generally with severe restrictions on political parties other than the ruling party. The principle of electing governments has not yet been recognised in Vietnam and Laos. Perhaps the only countries that have made some progress in this direction are Thailand, which has recognised a new constitution, and the Philippines after the overthrow of the Marcos regime. The free functioning of political parties is essential to the exercise of the right to take part in the government of one's country. However, except for the Philippines and Thailand, free functioning of political parties still remains a difficult concept to be accepted in practice. The use of national security laws is very much directed towards obstructing political activities of opposition parties. The free functioning of opposition parties is considered as an obstacle to economic progress and development in the prevailing conception of development in the ASEAN countries. One-party rule has generally been promoted as conducive to development and social stability. The restriction on participation in government directly or through representatives is also linked to the freedom of the press, freedom of expression in general and freedom of assembly. In many countries in the region there are restriction on the freedom of the press. These restrictions are very much a part of the "national security laws" in countries such as Singapore, Malaysia and Indonesia. In Cambodia, the restriction to the freedom of the press comes directly from the law relating to the press. Besides the direct application of law, there is also the intimidation caused by unidentifiable groups. There have been several killings of journalists in Cambodia, and no journalist has any legal access in Burma. The freedom to conduct political debates relating to matters affecting the life and liberty of persons is restricted in many of the countries through various means. Some countries use defamation laws to restrict discussion of political issues. What is very much related to the right to freedom of expression is the right to information. The right to information is perhaps the most neglected right in the ASEAN region. In none of the countries are there any established mechanisms to enable the citizens to obtain information from the government. In many instances, investigations into the complaints relating to corruption of State officers are not possible due to the lack of legal obligation on the part of the government to reveal information to the public. While the constitutions of the Philippines and the new constitution of Thailand recognise the right to information, constitutions of most other countries in the region do not recognise this right. Right Against Torture and Degrading Treatment According to Article 7 of the ICCPR, "no one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. In particular, no one shall be subjected without his free consent to medical and scientific experimentation." This right is generally neglected in some countries such as Indonesia, Burma and Cambodia, while in some other countries special categories of persons such as persons arrested under national security laws do not enjoy this right. Due to restriction on judicial access and human rights monitoring, it is difficult to assess the extent of violation of this right during the periods of prevalence of such national security laws. In Thailand, there is still the practice of the use of heavy scales on prisoners. This practice is usually justified on the ground of preventing escapes of prisoners while they are transported to courts or other places. However, the practice amounts to inhuman and degrading treatment. In countries such as Thailand, Indonesia, Burma, and Cambodia, the prison conditions are extremely primitive and the imposition of such conditions on convicted prisoners amounts to inhuman and degrading treatment. Particularly, illegal migrants are exposed to harsh conditions in prisons in Malaysia and Thailand. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ THE END +++++++++++++++++++++++++ From RobinS9 at parl.gc.ca Fri Nov 6 06:42:11 1998 From: RobinS9 at parl.gc.ca (Robinson, Svend - Assistant 2) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1998 16:42:11 -0500 Subject: [asia-apec 860] RE: Canadian Government Announces Support for APPA Message-ID: <8357B60C7BEDD01182DE00A02462107344FF49@HOC-EXC5> Hi Thanks for getting in touch. Unfortunately I don't quite understand what you want me to do. Please clarify, and I will do all I can to help. yours, Lily Grimes Svend Robinson's office > -----Original Message----- > From: Pacific Asia Resource Center [SMTP:parc@jca.ax.apc.org] > Sent: November 5, 1998 8:38 AM > To: asia-apec@jca.ax.apc.org > Subject: [asia-apec 856] Re: Canadian Government Announces > Support for APPA > > > Dear Secretariate, > could you send me your mail to this address as soon as possible? > ito asahi > > > ?????????????101-0052 ????????????2-1???? > ?F > TEL 03-3291-5901 FAX 03-3292-2437 e-mail:parc@jca.ax.apc.org > http://www.jca.ax.apc.org/parc > > Pacific Asia resource Center(PARC) > 3F, Hinoki Bldg., 2-1 Kanda Ogawa-cho, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo, Japan > 101-0052 > TEL +81-3-3291-5901 FAX +81-3-3292-2437 > parc@jca.ax.apc.org, http://www.jca.ax.apc.org/parc > From samysd at HK.Super.NET Fri Nov 6 02:58:46 1998 From: samysd at HK.Super.NET (Sinapan Samydorai) Date: Fri, 06 Nov 1998 01:58:46 +0800 Subject: [asia-apec 861] THE ASIAN HUMAN RIGHTS CHARTER - A PEOPLES' CHARTER Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.19981106015846.007625ac@pop.hk.super.net> OUR COMMON HUMANITY : ASIAN HUMAN RIGHTS CHARTER PREAMBLE For long, especially during the colonial period, the peoples of Asia suffered from gross violations of their rights and freedoms. Today large sections of our people continue to be exploited and oppressed and many of our societies are torn apart by hatred and intolerance. Increasingly the people realize that peace and dignity are possible only when the equal and inalienable rights of all persons and groups are recognised and protected. They are determined to secure peace and justice for themselves and the coming generations through the struggle for human rights and freedoms. Towards that end they adopt this Charter as an affirmation of the desire and aspirations of the peoples of Asia to live in peace and dignity. BACKGROUND TO THE CHARTER 1.1 The Asian struggle for rights and freedoms has deep historical roots, in the fight against oppression in civil society and the political oppression of colonialism, and subsequently for the establishment or restoration of democracy. The reaffirmation of rights is necessary now more than ever before. Asia is passing through a period of rapid change, which affects social structures, political institutions and the economy. Traditional values are under threat from new forms of development and technologies, as well as political authorities and economic organizations that manage these changes. 1.2 In particular the marketization and globalization of economies are changing the balance between the private and the public, the state and the international community, and worsening the situation of the poor and the disadvantaged. These changes threaten many valued aspects of life, the result of the dehumanizing effects of technology, the material orientation of the market, and the destruction of the community. People have decreasing control over their lives and environment, and some communities do not have protection even against eviction from their traditional homes and grounds. There is a massive exploitation of workers, with wages that are frequently inadequate for even bare subsistence and low safety standards that put the lives of workers in constant danger. Even the most elementary of labour rights and laws are seldom enforced. 1.3 Asian development is full of contradictions. There is massive and deepening poverty in the midst of growing affluence of some sections of the people. Levels of health, nutrition and education of large numbers of our people are appalling, denying the dignity of human life. At the same time valuable resources are wasted on armaments, Asia being the largest purchaser of arms of all regions. Our governments claim to be pursuing development directed at increasing levels of production and welfare but our natural resources are being depleted most irresponsibly and the environment is so degraded that the quality of life has worsened immeasurably, even for the better off among us. Building of golf courses has a higher priority than the care of the poor and the disadvantaged. 1.4 Asians have in recent decades suffered from various forms of conflict and violence, arising from ultra-nationalism, perverted ideologies, ethnic differences, and fundamentalism of all religions. Violence emanates from both the state and sections of civil society. For large masses, there is little security of person, property or community. There is massive displacement of communities and there are an increasing number of refugees. 1.5 Governments have arrogated enormous powers to themselves. They have enacted legislation to suppress people's rights and freedoms and colluded with foreign firms and groups in the plunder of national resources. Corruption and nepotism are rampant and there is little accountability of those holding public or private power. Authoritarianism has in many states been raised to the level of national ideology, with the deprivation of the rights and freedoms of their citizens, which are denounced as foreign ideas inappropriate to the religious and cultural traditions of Asia. Instead there is the exhortation of spurious theories of 'Asian Values' which are a thin disguise for their authoritarianism. Not surprisingly, Asia, of all the major regions of the world, is without a regional official charter or other regional arrangements for the protection of rights and freedoms. 1.6 In contrast to the official disregard or contempt of human rights in many Asian states, there is increasing awareness among their peoples of the importance of rights and freedoms. They realize the connections between their poverty and political powerlessness and the denial to them of these rights and freedoms. They believe that political and economic systems have to operate within a framework of human rights and freedoms to ensure economic justice, political participation and accountability, and social peace. There are many social movements that have taken up the fight to secure for the people their rights and freedoms. 1.7 Our commitment to rights is not due to any abstract ideological reasons. We believe that respect for human rights provides the basis for a just, humane and caring society. A regime of rights is premised on the belief that we are all inherently equal and have an equal right to live in dignity. It is based on our right to determine our destiny through participation in policy making and administration. It enables us to develop and enjoy our culture and to give expression to our artistic impulses. It respects diversity. It recognizes our obligations to future generations and the environment they will inherit. It establishes standards for assessing the worth and legitimacy of our institutions and policies. GENERAL PRINCIPLES 2.1 It is possible from specific rights and the institutions and procedures for their protection to draw some general principles which underlie these rights and whose acceptance and implementation facilitates their full enjoyment. The principles, which are discussed below, should provide the broad framework for public policies within which we believe rights would be promoted. UNIVERSALITY AND INDIVISIBILITY OF RIGHTS 2.2 We endorse the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and other international instruments for the protection of rights and freedoms. We believe that rights are universal, every person being entitled to them by virtue of being a human being. Cultural traditions affect the way in which a society organizes relationships within itself, but they do not detract from the universalism of rights which are primarily concerned with the relationship of citizens with the state and the inherent dignity of persons and groups. We also believe that rights and freedoms are indivisible and it is a fallacy to suppose that some types of rights can be suppressed in the name of other rights. Human beings have social, cultural and economic needs and aspirations that cannot be fragmented or compartmentalised, but are mutually dependent. Civil, political and cultural rights have little meaning unless there are the economic resources to exercise and enjoy them. Equally, the pursuit and acquisition of material wealth is sterile and self-defeating without political freedoms, the opportunity to develop and express one's personality and to engage in cultural and other discourses. 2.3 Notwithstanding their universality and indivisibility, the enjoyment and the salience of rights depend on social, economic and cultural contexts. Rights are not abstractions, but foundations for action and policy. Consequently we must move from abstract formulations of rights to their concretization in the Asian context by examining the circumstances of specific groups whose situation is defined by massive violations of their rights. It is only by relating rights and their implementation to the specificity of the Asian situation that the enjoyment of rights will be possible. Only in this way will Asia be able to contribute to the world-wide movement for the protection of rights. 2.4 Widespread poverty, even in states which have achieved a high rate of economic development, is a principal cause of the violation of rights. Poverty deprives individuals, families, and communities of their rights and promotes prostitution, child labour, slavery, sale of human organs, and the mutilation of the body to enhance the capacity to beg. A life of dignity is impossible in the midst of poverty. Asian states must direct their development policies towards the elimination of poverty through more equitable forms of development. THE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE PROTECTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS 2.5The responsibility for the protection of rights is both international and domestic. The international community has agreed upon norms and institutions that should govern the practice of human rights. The peoples of Asia support international measures for the protection of rights. State sovereignty cannot be used as an excuse to evade international norms or ignore international institutions. The claim of state sovereignty is justified only when a state fully protects the rights of its citizens. 2.6 On the other hand, international responsibility cannot be used for the selective chastisement or punishment of particular states; or for the privileging of one set of rights over others. Some fundamental causes of the violation of human rights lie in the inequities of the international world economic and political order. The radical transformation and democratization of the world order is a necessary condition for the global enjoyment of human rights. The logic of the universalism and equality of rights is the responsibility of the international community for the social and economic welfare of all people throughout the world, and consequently the obligation to ensure a more equitable distribution of resources and opportunities across the world. 2.7 The primary responsibility for the promotion of human rights rests with states. The rights of states and peoples to just economic, social, political and cultural development must not be negated by global processes. States must establish open political processes in which rights and obligations of different groups are acknowledged and the balance between the interests of individuals and the community is achieved. Democratic and accountable governments are the key to the promotion and protection of rights. 2.8 The capacity of the international community and states to promote and protect rights has been weakened by processes of globalization as more and more power over economic and social policy and activities has moved from states to business corporations. States are increasingly held hostage by financial and other corporations to implement narrow and short sighted economic policies which cause so much misery to so many people, while increasing the wealth of the few. Business corporations are responsible for numerous violations of rights, particularly those of workers, women and indigenous peoples. It is necessary to strengthen the regime of rights by making corporations liable for the violation of rights. SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT AND THE PROTECTION OF THE ENVIRONMENT 2.9 Economic development must be sustainable. We must protect the environment against the avarice and depredations of commercial enterprises to ensure that the quality of life does not decline just as the gross national product increases. Technology must liberate, not enslave human beings. Natural resources must be used in a manner consistent with our obligation to future generations. We must never forget that we are merely temporary custodians of the resources of nature. Nor should we forget that these resources are given to all human kind, and consequently we have a joint responsibility for their responsible, fair and equitable use. RIGHTS 3.1 We endorse all the rights that are contained in international instruments. It is unnecessary to restate them here. We believe that these rights need to be seen in a holistic manner and that individual rights are best pursued through a broader conceptualization which forms the basis of the following section. THE RIGHT TO LIFE 3.2 Foremost among rights is the right to life, from which flow other rights and freedoms. The right to life is not confined to mere physical or animal existence but includes the right to every limb or faculty through which life is enjoyed. It signifies the right to live with basic human dignity, the right to livelihood, the right to a habitat or home, the right to education and the right to a clean and healthy environment for without these there can be no real and effective exercise or enjoyment of the right to life. The state must also take all possible measures to prevent infant mortality, eliminate malnutrition and epidemics, and increase life expectancy through a clean and healthy environment and adequate preventative as well as curative medical facilities. It must make primary education free and compulsory. 3.3 Yet in many parts of Asia, wars, ethnic conflicts, cultural and religious oppression, corruption of politics, environmental pollution, disappearances, torture, state or private terrorism, violence against women, and other acts of mass violence continue to be a scourge to humanity resulting in the loss of thousands of innocent human lives. 3.4 To ensure the right to life, propagation of war or ethnic conflict or incitement to hatred and violence in all spheres of individual or societal or national or international life should be prohibited. 3.5 The state has the responsibility to thoroughly investigate cases of torture, disappearances and custodial deaths, rapes and sexual abuses and to bring culprits to justice. 3.6 There must be no arbitrary deprivation of life. States should take measures not only to prevent and mete out punish for the deprivation of life by criminal acts and terrorist acts but also prevent arbitrary disappearances and killings by their own security forces. The law must strictly control and limit the circumstances in which a person may be deprived of his or her life by state authorities or officials. 3.7 All states must abolish the death penalty. Where it exists, it may be imposed only rarely for the most serious crimes. Before a person can be deprived of life by the imposition of the death penalty, he or she must be ensured a fair trial before an independent and impartial tribunal with full opportunity of legal representation of his or her choice, adequate time for preparation of defence, presumption of innocence and the right to review by a higher tribunal. Execution should never be carried out in public or otherwise exhibited in public. THE RIGHT TO PEACE 4.1 All persons have the right to live in peace so that they can fully develop all their capacities, physical, intellectual, moral and spiritual, without being the target of any kind of violence. The peoples of Asia have suffered great hardships and tragedies due to wars and civil conflicts which have caused many deaths, mutilation of bodies, external or internal displacement of persons, break up of families, and in general the denial of any prospects of a civilized or peaceful existence. Both the state and civil society have in many countries become heavily militarized in which all scores are settled by force and citizens have no protection against the intimidation and terror of state or private armies. 4.2 The duty of the state to maintain law and order should be conducted under strict restraint on the use of force in accordance with standards established by the international community, including humanitarian law. Every individual and group is entitled to protection against all forms of state violence, including violence perpetrated by its police and military forces. 4.3 The right to live in peace requires that political, economic or social activities of the state, the corporate sector and the civil society should respect the security of all peoples, especially of vulnerable groups. People must be ensured security in relation to the natural environment they live in, the political, economic and social conditions which permit them to satisfy their needs and aspirations without recourse to oppression, exploitation, violence, and without detracting from all that is of value in their society. 4.4 In fighting fascist invasion, colonialism, and neo-colonialism, Asian states played a crucial role in creating conditions for their peoples to live in peace. In this fight, they had justifiably stressed the importance of national integrity and non-intervention by hegemonic powers. However, the demands of national integrity or protection against the threats of foreign domination cannot now be used as a pretext for refusing to the people their right to personal security and peaceful existence any more than the suppression of people's rights can be justified as an excuse to attract foreign investments. Neither can they justify any refusal to inform the international community about the individual security of its people. The right of persons to live in peace can be guaranteed only if the states are accountable to the international community. 4.5 The international community of states has been deeply implicated in wars and civil conflicts in Asia. Foreign states have used Asian groups as surrogates to wage wars and have armed groups and governments engaged in internal conflicts. They have made huge profits out of the sale of armaments. The enormous expenditures on arms have diverted public revenues from programmes for the development of the country or the well-being of the people. Military bases and other establishments (often of foreign powers) have threatened the social and physical security of the people who live in their vicinity. THE RIGHT TO DEMOCRACY 5.1 Colonialism and other modern developments significantly changed the nature of Asian political societies. The traditional systems of accountability and public participation in affairs of state as well as the relationship of citizens to the government were altered fundamentally. Citizens became subjects, while the government became more pervasive and powerful. Colonial laws and authoritarian habits and style of administration persisted after independence. The state has become the source of corruption and the oppression of the people. The democratization and humanization of the state is a pre-condition for the respect for and the protection of rights. 5.2 The state, which claims to have the primary responsibility for the development and well-being of the people, should be humane, open and accountable. The corollary of the respect for human rights is a tolerant and pluralistic system, in which people are free to express their views and to seek to persuade others and in which the rights of minorities are respected. People must participate in public affairs, through the electoral and other decision-making and implementing processes, free from racial, religious or gender discriminations. THE RIGHT TO CULTURAL IDENTITY AND THE FREEDOM OF CONSCIENCE 6.1 The right to life involves not only material but also the moral conditions which permit a person to lead a meaningful existence. This meaning is not only individually determined but is also based on shared living with other human beings. The Asian traditions stress the importance of common cultural identities. Cultural identities help individuals and communities to cope with the pressures of economic and social change; they give meaning to life in a period of rapid transformation. They are the source of pride and security. There are many vulnerable communities in Asia as elsewhere whose cultures are threatened or derided. Asian peoples and governments must respect the cultures and traditions of its diverse communities. 6.2 The plurality of cultural identities in Asia is not contrary to the universality of human rights but rather as so many cultural manifestations of human dignity enriching universal norms. At the same time we Asian peoples must eliminate those features in our cultures which are contrary to the universal principles of human rights. We must transcend the traditional concept of the family based on patriarchal traditions so as to retrieve in each of our cultural traditions, the diversity of family norms which guarantee women's human rights. We must be bold in reinterpreting our religious beliefs which support gender inequality. We must also eliminate discriminations based on caste, ethnic origins, occupation, place of origin and others, while enhancing in our respective cultures all values related to mutual tolerance and mutual support. We must stop practices which sacrifice the individual to the collectivity or to the powerful, and thus renew our communal and national solidarity. 6.3 The freedom of religion and conscience is particularly important in Asia where most people are deeply religious. Religion is a source of comfort and solace in the midst of poverty and oppression. Many find their primary identity in religion. However religious fundamentalism is also a cause of divisions and conflict. Religious tolerance is essential for the enjoyment of the right of conscience of others, which includes the right to change one's belief. THE RIGHT TO DEVELOPMENT AND SOCIAL JUSTICE 7.1 Every individual has the right to the basic necessities of life and to protection against abuse and exploitation. We all have the right to literacy and knowledge, to food and clean water, shelter and to medical facilities for a healthy existence. All individuals and human groups are entitled to share the benefits of the progress of technology and of the growth of the world economy. 7.2 Development, for individuals and states, does not mean merely economic development. It means the realization of the full potential of the human person. Consequently they have the right to artistic freedom, freedom of expression and the cultivation of their cultural and spiritual capacities. It means the right to participate in the affairs of the state and the community. It implies that states have the right to determine their own economic, social and cultural policies free from hegemonic pressures and influences. RIGHTS OF VULNERABLE GROUPS 8.1 Asian states should formulate and implement public policies within the above general framework of rights. We believe that in this way we will establish fair and humane conditions for our individual and corporate lives and ensure social justice. However, there are particular groups who for historical or other reasons are weak and vulnerable and consequently require special protection for the equal and effective enjoyment of their human rights. We discuss the situation of several such groups, but we recognize that there are also other groups who suffer from discrimination and oppression. They include people who through civil conflict, government policies or economic hardships are displaced from their homes and seek refuge in other places internally or in foreign lands. Our states and societies have become less tolerant of minorities and indigenous people, whose most basic rights are frequently violated. Many of our societies still discriminate against gays and lesbians, denying them their identity and causing them great anguish and misery. Various economic groups, like peasants and fishing communities, suffer from great deprivation and live in constant fear of threats to their livelihood from landlords and capitalist enterprises. All these groups deserve special attention. We urge states and communities to give the highest priority to the amelioration of their social and economic conditions. WOMEN 9.1 In most Asian societies women suffer from discrimination and oppression. The cause of their oppression lies in both history and contemporary social and economic systems. 9.2 The roots of patriarchy are systemic and its structures dominate all institutions, attitudes, social norms and customary laws, religions and values in Asian societies, crossing the boundaries of class, culture, caste and ethnicity. Oppression takes many forms, but is most evident in sexual slavery, domestic violence, trafficking in women and rape. They suffer discrimination in both public and private spheres. The increasing militarization of many societies in Asia has led to the increase of violence against women in situations of armed conflict, including mass rape, forced labour, racism, kidnapping and displacement from their homes. As female victims of armed conflict are often denied justice, rehabilitation, compensation and reparation of the war crimes committed against them, it is important to emphasis that systematic rape is a war crime and a crime against humanity. 9.3 To end discrimination against women in the field of employment and the right to work, women should be given the right to employment opportunities, the free choice of profession, job security, equal remuneration, the right to compensation in respect of domestic work, the right to protection of health and safe working conditions, especially in safeguarding of the function of reproduction and special protection in times of pregnancy from work that may be harmful. Women should be given the full right to control their sexual and reproductive health, free from discrimination or coercion, and be given access to information about sexual and reproductive health care and safe reproductive technology. 9.4 There are few legal provisions to protect women against violations of their rights within the domestic and patriarchal realm. Their rights in public law are seldom observed. Affirmative measures should be taken to ensure full and equal participation of women in the political and public life of the society. A considerable increase in the presence of women in the various institutions of state power and in the fields of business, agriculture and land ownership must be provided for by way of affirmative action. The political, social and economic empowerment of women is essential for the defence of their legal rights. CHILDREN 10.1 As with women, their oppression takes many forms, the most pervasive of which are child labour; sexual slavery; child pornography; the sale and trafficking of children; prostitution; sale of organs; conscription into drug trafficking; the physical, sexual and psychological abuse of children within families; discrimination against children with HIV/AIDS; forced religious conversion of children; the displacement of children with and without their families by armed conflicts; discrimination; and environmental degradation. An increasing number of children are forced to live on the streets of Asian cities and are deprived of the social and economic support of families and communities. 10.2 Widespread poverty, lack of access to education and social dislocation in rural areas are among the causes of the trends which increase the vulnerability of children. Long-established forms of exploitation and abuse, such as bonded labour or the use of children for begging or sexual gratification are rampant. Female infanticide due to patriarchal gender preference and female genital mutilation are widely practised in some Asian countries. 10.3 Asian states have failed dismally to look after children and provide them with even the bare means of subsistence or shelter. We call on Asian states to ratify and implement the Convention on the Rights of the Child. We also call on communities to take the responsibility for monitoring violations of children's rights and to press for the implementation of the UN Convention in appropriate ways in their own social contexts. DIFFERENTLY ABLED PERSONS 11.1 Traditionally Asian societies cared for those who were physically or mentally handicapped. Increasingly our communal values and structures, under the pressure of new forms of economic organizations, have become less tolerant of such persons. They suffer enormous discrimination in access to education, employment and housing. They are unable to enjoy many of their human rights due to prejudice against them and the absence of provisions responding to their special demands. Their considerable abilities are not properly recognized and they are forced into jobs which offer low pay and little prospects of promotion. They have the right to provisions which enable them to live in dignity, with security and respect, and to have opportunities to realize their full potential. 11.2 The need to treat such persons with respect for their human rights is apparent in the dismal way Asian states treat those with HIV or AIDS. They are the victims of gross discrimination. A civilized society which respects human rights would recognize their right to live and die with dignity. It would secure to them the right to adequate medical care and to be protected from prejudice, discrimination or persecution. WORKERS 12.1 The rapid industrialization of Asian societies has undermined traditional forms of the subsistence economy and has destroyed possibilities of the livelihood of large sections of the rural people. Increasingly they and other groups are forced into wage employment, often in industry, working under appalling conditions. For the majority of the workers there is little or no protection from unfair labour laws. The fundamental rights to form trade unions and bargain collectively are denied to many. Their wages are grossly inadequate and working conditions are frequently grim and dangerous. Globalization adds to the pressures on workers as many Asian states seek to reduce the costs of production, often in collusion with foreign corporations and international financial institutions. 12.2 A particularly vulnerable category of workers are migrant workers. Frequently separated from their families, they are exploited in foreign states whose laws they do not understand and are afraid to invoke. They are often denied rights and conditions which local workers enjoy. They slog without access to adequate accommodation, health care, or legal protection. In many cases migrants suffer racism and xenophobia, and domestic helpers are subjected to humiliation and sometimes, sexual abuse. STUDENTS 13.1 Students in Asia struggled against colonialism and fought for democratization and social justice. As a result of their fearless commitment to social transformation they have often suffered from state violence and repression and remain as one of the key targets for counter-insurgency operations and internal security laws and operations. Students are frequently denied the right to academic freedom and to the freedoms of expression and association. PRISONERS AND POLITICAL DETAINEES 14.1 In few areas is there such a massive violation of internationally recognized norms as in relation to prisoners and political detainees. 14.2 Arbitrary arrests, detention, imprisonment, ill-treatment, torture, cruel and inhuman punishment are common occurrences in many parts of Asia. Detainees and prisoners are often forced to live in unhygienic conditions, are denied adequate food and health care and are prevented from having communication with, and support from, their families. Different kinds of prisoners are frequently mixed in one cell, with men, women and children kept in proximity. Prison cells are normally overcrowded. Deaths in custody are common. Prisoners are frequently denied access to lawyers and the right to fair and speedy trials. 14.3 Asian governments often use executive powers of detention without trial. They use national security legislation to arrest and detain political opponents. It is notable that, in many countries in Asia, freedom of thought, belief and conscience have been restricted by administrative limits on freedom of speech and association. THE ENFORCEMENT OF RIGHTS 15.1 Many Asian states have guarantees of human rights in their constitutions, and many of them have ratified international instruments on human rights. However, there continues to be a wide gap between rights enshrined in these documents and the abject reality that denies people their rights. Asian states must take urgent action to implement the human rights of their citizens and residents. PRINCIPLES FOR ENFORCEMENT 15.2 We believe that systems for the protection of rights should be based on the following principles. 15.2a Human rights are violated by the state, civil society and business corporations. The legal protection for rights has to be extended against violations by all these groups. It is also necessary to reform these groups by strengthening their ethical foundations and values and inculcating in them a sense of their responsibility towards the disadvantaged and the oppressed. 15.2b The promotion and enforcement of rights is the respon-sibility of all groups in society, although the primary responsibility is that of the state. The enjoyment of many rights, especially social and economic, requires a positive and proactive role of governments. There is a clear and legitimate role for NGOs in raising consciousness of rights, formulating standards, and ensuring their protection by governments and other groups. Professional groups like lawyers and doctors have special responsibilities connected with the nature of their work to promote the enforcement of rights and prevent abuses of power. 15.2c Since rights are seriously violated in situations of civil strife and are strengthened if there is peace, it is the duty of the state and other organizations to find peaceful ways to resolve social and ethnic conflicts and to promote tolerance and harmony. For the same reasons no state should seek to dominate other states and states should settle their differences peacefully. 15.2d Rights are enhanced if democratic and consensual practices are followed and it is therefore the responsibility of all states and other organisations to promote these practices in their work and in their dealings with others. 15.2e Many individuals and groups in Asia are unable to exercise their rights due to restrictive or oppressive social customs and practices, particularly those related to caste, gender, or religion. Therefore the immediate reform of these customs and practices is necessary for the protection of rights. The reforms must be enforced with vigour and determination. 15.2f A humane and vigorous civil society is necessary for the promotion and protection of human rights and freedoms, for securing rights within civil society and to act as a check on state institutions. Freedoms of expression and association are necessary for the establishment and functioning of institutions of civil society. 15.2g It is necessary to curb the exploitative practices of business corporations and to ensure that they do not violate rights of workers, consumers and the public. STRENGTHENING THE FRAMEWORK FOR RIGHTS 15.3a It is essential to secure the legal framework for rights. All states should include guarantees of rights in their constitutions, which should be constitutionally protected against erosion by legislative amendments. They should also ratify international human rights instruments. They should review their legislation and administrative practices against national and international standards with the aim of repealing provisions which contravene these standards, particularly legislation carried over from the colonial period. 15.3b Knowledge and consciousness of rights should be raised among the general public, and state and civil society institutions. Awareness of the national and international regime of rights should be promoted. Individuals and groups should be acquainted with legal and administrative procedures whereby they can secure their rights and prevent abuse of authority. NGOs should be encouraged to become familiar with and deploy mechanisms, both national and inter-national, for monitoring and review of rights. Judicial and administrative decisions on the protection of rights should be widely disseminated, nationally and in the Asian region. Governments, NGOs and educational institutions should co-operate in disseminating information about the importance and content of human rights. 15.3c Numerous violations of rights occur while people are in custody and through other activities of security forces. Sometimes these violations take place because the security forces do not respect the permissible scope of their powers or do not realise that the orders under which they are acting are unlawful. Members of the police, prison services and the armed forces should be provided training in human rights norms. THE MACHINERY FOR THE ENFORCEMENT OF RIGHTS 15.4a The judiciary is a major means for the protection of rights. It has the power to receive complaints of the violation of rights, to hear evidence, and to provide redress for violations, including punishment for violators. The judiciary can only perform this function if the legal system is strong and well-organized. The members of the judiciary should be competent, experienced and have a commitment to human rights, dignity and justice. They should be independent of the legislature and the executive by vesting the power of their appointment in a judicial service commission and by constitutional safeguards of their tenure. Judicial institutions should fairly reflect the character of the different sections of the people by religion, region, gender and social class. This means that there must be a restructuring of the judiciary and the investigative machinery. More women, more under-privileged categories and more of the Pariahs of society must by deliberate State action be lifted out of the mire and instilled in judicial positions with necessary training. Only such a measure will command the confidence of the weaker sector whose human rights are ordinarily ignored in the traditional societies of Asia. 15.4.b The legal profession should be independent. Legal aid should be provided for those who are unable to afford the services of lawyers or have access to courts, for the protection of their rights. Rules which unduly restrict access to courts should be reformed to provide a broad access. Social and welfare organizations should be authorised to bring legal action on behalf of individuals and groups who are unable to utilize the courts. 15.4c All states should establish Human Rights Commissions and specialized institutions for the protection of rights, particularly of vulnerable members of society. They can provide easy, friendly and inexpensive access to justice for victims of human rights violations. These bodies can supplement the role of the judiciary. They enjoy special advantages: they can help establish standards for the implementation of human rights norms; they can disseminate information about human rights; they can investigate allegations of violation of rights; they can promote conciliation and mediation; and they can seek to enforce human rights through administrative or judicial means. They can act on their own initiative as well on complaints from members of the public. 15.4d Civil society institutions can help to enforce rights through the organization of People's Tribunals, which can touch the conscience of the government and the public. The establishment of People's Tribunals emphasizes that the responsibility for the protection of rights is wide, and not a preserve of the state. They are not confined to legal rules in their adjudication and can consequently help to uncover the moral and spiritual foundations of human rights. REGIONAL INSTITUTIONS FOR THE PROTECTION OF RIGHTS 16.1 The protection of human rights should be pursued at all levels, local, national, regional and international. Institutions at each level have their special advantages and skills. The primary responsibility for the protection of rights is that of states, therefore priority should be given to the enhancement of state capacity to fulfil this obligation. 16.2 Asian states should adopt regional or sub-regional institutions for the promotion and protection of rights. There should be an inter-state Convention on Human Rights, formulated in regional forums with the collaboration of national and regional NGOs. The Convention must address the realities of Asia, particularly the obstacles that impede the enjoyment of rights. At the same time it must be fully consistent with international norms and standards. It should cover violations of rights by groups and corporations in addition to state institutions. An independent commission or a court must be established to enforce the Convention. Access to the commission or the court must be open to NGOs and other social organizations. ****************************************************************** Asian Human Rights Commission Tel: +(852)-2698-6339 Unit D, 7 Floor, 16 Argyle Str. Fax:+(852)-2698-6367 Mongkok Commercial Centre Email: ua@hk.super.net Kowloon, Hong Kong SAR CHINA samysd@hk.super.net http://www.hk.super.net/~ahrchk ****************************************************************** From tpl at cheerful.com Fri Nov 6 09:05:43 1998 From: tpl at cheerful.com (BAYAN) Date: Fri, 06 Nov 1998 08:05:43 +0800 Subject: [asia-apec 862] "Americanisation" of Canada's Banking System Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.19981106080543.006c230c@pop.skyinet.net> Date: Thu, 05 Nov 1998 09:34:05 -0500 From: Michel Chossudovsky < THE "AMERICANISATION" OF CANADA'S BANKING SYSTEM 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.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 OTTAWA- A Liberal task force on financial services recommended (November 4, 1998) to Finance Minister Paul Martin to turn down the proposed bank mergers. The latter would have led to the "Americanisation" of Canada's banking system. Under the merger proposal, two mega-banks, Canada's "Big Two" (CIBC-TD and Royal-Montreal) would control more than 70 percent of the nation's bank assets, loans and deposits. The "Big Two" have already established themselves (through their US based affiliates) as bona fide American banks confortably positioned in the US financial landscape. They have close ties to Wall Street and have offices scattered in the numerous offshore tax havens. Wood Gundy Securities Corp., CIBC's brokerage firm has recently acquired the New York based investment bank Oppenheimer and Co. Inc. The latter specialises (on behalf of CIBC) in high risk hedge funds in the former Soviet Union. Royal Bank CEO John Cleghorn, stated triumphantly in July 1998 that "he would use Bank of Montreal's Chicago-based Harris Bank subsidiary as the launch pad for an expansion in the United States..I [Cleghorn] would think on the wealth management side you're clearly talking about acquisitions because we've got to build a stronger base of capability there [the US], especially in investment management and mutual funds,"(Reuters dispatch, Royal Bank CEO targets U.S. expansion, July 17, 1998). In return for their admittance to the US market, the Canadian banking system would be thrown open to foreign competition. "The Big Two" will unselfishly share the spoils with their Wall Street counterparts: "Canadian banks [meaning the "Big Two"] welcome unfettered competition as long as mergers among the country's largest banks are allowed"(Ibid). The large Wall Street commercial banks and brokerage houses including Citibank, Chase Manhattan, J.P. Morgan, and others would eventually come to dominate a large share of the Canadian financial services industry. "Americanisation" of Canadian Banks Rather than "enhancing competitiveness" as claimed by the MacKay Task Force on the Future of the Canadian Financial Services Sector, the mergers combined with an "open door" to foreign financial institutions would lead to the rapid "Americanisation" of the Canadian banking system. Canadian and American banks (and brokerage houses) would eventually become indistinguishable. The "Big Two" already consider themselves as North-American banks; the smaller chartered banks as well as the Credit Unions would eventually be edged out or swallowed up, more than 20,000 jobs in the banking industry would be lost. The mergers would dramatically affect access to loanable funds particularly by small and medium sized enterprises. According to Bank of Nova Scotia's CEO, Peter Godsoe "one third of [Canada's] highly successful [banking] system will either change significantly or disappear completely... [Two mega-banks] would have an overwhelming dominance... [with] a level of concentration without precedent, and one that would be considered unacceptable in any other country of the world." (Financial Post, Toronto, May 27, 1998) By-passing the Democratic Process Finance Minister Paul Martin is anxious to enforce the "Americanisation" of the Canadian banking system without consulting Canadians. An executive decision on behalf of the "Big Two" and their Wall Street counterparts, to authorise the bank mergers (alongside the deregulation of the financial services industry) would blatantly violate Article 91 of the Constitution. The latter stipulates unequivocally that "the exclusive Legislative Authority of the Parliament of Canada extends to (...) the borrowing of money on the Public credit, (...) Currency and Coinage, Banking, Incorporation of Banks and the Issue of Paper Money, Savings Banks..." (Canadian Constitution, section VI Distribution of Legislative Powers, art. 91). National Sovereignty The mergers combined with financial deregulation would transform Canada and its provinces. With Canadian banks fully integrated into the US financial landscape, Canada would no longer constitute a separate economic and financial entity. Canada as a nation would be transformed. The process initiated under NAFTA in the areas of trade and investment, would reach its fruition: monetary policy (implying the command through money creation over productive resources including the financing of government spending) would eventually be tranferred to the US Federal Reserve System leading to the demise of the Bank of Canada or its transformation into a regional subsidiary of the US Federal reserve system. At the same token, this would signify the privatisation of monetary policy, --ie. the federal reserve banks although operating as State banks on behalf of the US Treasury are in fact controlled by private commercial banks which are their stock-holders. Money creation is the basis of economic and political sovereignty. If the bank reforms were to go ahead, this would affect the foundations of the Canadian monetary system. In the words of William L. McKenzie King: "Once a nation parts with control of its currency and credit, it matters not who makes that nation's law. Until the control of the issue of currency and credit is restored to government and recognised as its most conspicuous and sacred responsibility, all talk of the sovereignty of Parliament and of democracy is idle and futile". (Radio Address, 1933). The recommendation of the Liberal task force on financial services does not signify that the bank merger proposal is dead. The banks have not given up the battle: CIBC and TD have stated that "while it is a setback, the game is not over". It is also important to make sure that the mergers are not implemented in a de facto fashion through the back door, by bypassing Legislative approval. From mramdatt at UVic.CA Fri Nov 6 11:59:26 1998 From: mramdatt at UVic.CA (M. E. Ramdatt) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1998 18:59:26 -0800 (PST) Subject: [asia-apec 863] List Serve Message-ID: Please remove my e-mail address from the apec-people's summit list server until further notice. Thank you. mramdatt@uvic.ca From gattwd at corso.ch.planet.gen.nz Fri Nov 6 13:15:57 1998 From: gattwd at corso.ch.planet.gen.nz (Gatt Watchdog) Date: Fri, 06 Nov 1998 16:15:57 +1200 Subject: [asia-apec 864] APEC articles from NZ Message-ID: >From The Christchurch Press - November 05, 1998 (New Zealand) 'Apec's showpiece: made-for-media' Previous governments have gone to great lengths to suppress dissension during Apec summits. AZIZ CHOUDRY writes that the New Zealand Government will do the same. The Apec leaders' summit in Auckland is less than a year away. There is already a steady trickle of superlatives and upbeat predictions from the Government. The private sector is busy talking up the supposed benefits of Apec. We can expect the trickle to become a raging torrent from November 18, once New Zealand takes over the Apec chair. This is not a good year to be in charge. Behind the hype and the glitz, Apec is looking decidedly fragile. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade hopes to "shape a credible Apec response to the economic crisis" and "achieve further substantive progress towards trade and investment liberalisation". Failure to do so, it claims, "will damage Apec's credibility, and New Zealand as chair". A wave of anxiety has spread across many ardent Apec advocates, including New Zealand politicians and officials. They would have been nervous enough that Malaysia's Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad, a vocal critic of the free-market economic orthodoxy that dominates Apec, will host this year's meetings. Recently Dr Mahathir has introduced capital controls and is embroiled in major domestic upheaval. Japan is now suffering its worst recession since World War 2, and resisting pressure to liberalise its forestry and fisheries sectors in line with Apec early voluntary sectoral liberalisation commitments. There is even talk of recession in the United States. Many economists and politicians are now suggesting that free-market policies, which Apec exists to promote, may leave countries too exposed. At home growing numbers of people are questioning the wisdom of New Zealand's economic reforms, privatisations, asset sales, deregulation, and trade and investment liberalisation. With an election date uncertain, the last thing the Government wants is strong domestic opposition to Apec. Leaders' summits are largely irrelevant to Apec's work programme, most of which is agreed upon during the year at numerous closed meetings of officials, ministers, private sector representatives, and Apec working groups. As Apec's showpiece they are a made-for-media event. Economic leaders smile and wave in unison to the cameras as they try to reassure markets that all is well with Apec's push to open up the region's economies. Behind the hype and the glitz lies the uncomfortable fact that leaders' summits have come to symbolise the human rights abuses that critics believe inevitably accompany free trade and investment regimes. More people probably remember Apec in 1996 for the demolition of shanty dwellings and the removal of more than 33,000 squatter families in Manila than anything the official meetings said or did. The Ramos Government wanted an "eyesore-free" zone to convey an impression of a prosperous, poverty-free, dissent-free "tiger cub" economy before the Apec VIPs arrived. Central Luzon was put under de facto martial law, and farmers were blocked from harvesting crops for "security" reasons. Surveillance and harassment of dissidents increased and pro-government paramilitary groups were reactivated to intimidate those planning to oppose Apec. Long after memories of the 1997 Apec meeting in Vancouver faded actions by Canadian police against non-violent protesters -- mostly students -- continue to grip media headlines and rock Jean Chretien's Government. Official documents have linked directives from the Prime Minister's Office to the pepper-spraying and heavy-handed arrests of anti-Apec protesters. Police had targeted some organisers for "pre-arrest" to "eliminate" them before the leaders' meeting. Others were arrested for simply holding signs which read "free speech". The operation was not driven by legitimate security concerns but rather aimed to spare visiting leaders, notably Suharto, from political embarrassment. Chretien has been roasted in Parliament by opposition parties over "SprayPEC". Several civil suits are being taken against the police, and on October 5 a police Public Complaints Commission began to investigate complaints of excessive police force, improper arrest, and breach of civil liberties. What happens in Kuala Lumpur this month remains to be seen. How will Apec in Auckland be remembered? Next September parts of the city will resemble a militarised zone. Security costs alone for Apec 1999 are budgeted to top $18 million. If previous years are anything to go by, the primary function of the high security will be to suppress domestic dissent and help shield the Apec entourage from anything that might run counter to the Government's carefully concocted image of New Zealand, rather than to shield dignitaries from genuine or perceived threats. New Zealand security forces have already begun preparing for Apec with a recent major counter-terrorist training exercise, Operation Lawman 98. Pressure is now on the Government to amend the Arms Act so foreign security personnel can carry guns during the Apec summit. The Government's track record shows it has little tolerance for critics of its economic agenda. Democratic rights of freedom of expression and peaceful assembly were violated during the 1995 Commonwealth Heads of Government, and Asian Development Bank meetings. A bungled SIS break-in was discovered at my house just before the 1996 Apec trade ministers meeting in Christchurch. These are hardly the hallmarks of the open participatory democracy that the Government plans to portray to the international media next year. Previous Apec host governments have gone to great lengths and expense to promote a sanitised image of economic success for these annual meetings, and to protect Apec leaders from the slightest whiff of political embarrassment. Why should we expect the New Zealand Government to behave any differently? Aziz Choudry, of GATT Watchdog, attended parallel meetings of peoples' organisations in Osaka, Manila, and Vancouver at the time of the Apec leaders' summits. -------------------------------------------------------------- What will hosting Apec 1999 mean for NZ? 'Publicity NZ can't afford to buy' New Zealand will gain from hosting Apec, writes DON McKINNON. In just 11 months New Zealand will host a meeting that will thrust it into the world spotlight as never before. We have never had a better opportunity to showcase our country to the world. The Apec 1999 Economic Leaders' Meeting will bring to Auckland the leaders of 20 major economies from the Pacific Rim, including the United States, Japan, Russia, and China. More than 4000 international delegates will visit New Zealand. Apec will attract around 2500 of the world's media, generating international exposure and publicity we could never afford to buy. Initial estimates indicate that Apec will attract more than $65 million into the local economy. Add to this the value of the international exposure, and its a pretty good return for an investment of $44m. And these are just the short-term gains. Long-term gains amount to expanding trade opportunities, and a stronger economy. This means more jobs and more money to spend on social goals such as health and education. Apec is important for all of us. New Zealand effectively takes the chair of the Apec process for the 1998-99 year, following this month's Apec leaders' meeting in Malaysia. At that meeting Apec's work programme for 1999 will be determined and our role more clearly defined. Naturally, the Kuala Lumpur meeting will be dominated by the Asian economic crisis. It is heartening to note that despite the pressures the crisis has put on the region, all Apec members have maintained their commitment to Apec's open-market goals. These are to achieve free and open trade and investment in the region by 2010 for developed economies and 2020 for developing ones. In fact, those economies hit hardest by the crisis -- such as Korea and Thailand -- are those most committed. They see the Apec agenda as part of the solution to the structural problems of their economies -- many of the same structural problems that New Zealand has painfully worked through over the past 15 years. The commitment to Apec's policy agenda is vital as we seek to reinvigorate growth and investment in the region. If we've learned one thing from history, it's that economic isolationism does not work. Last year in Vancouver, Canada, 15 economic sectors were identified as candidates for liberalisation even earlier than the 2010-2020 goal. This initiative, called early voluntary sector liberalisation, includes two important sectors in our economy -- fisheries and forestry. Much of our total trade in these products is within the Apec region, and some regional economies have very high tariff barriers on them. It has been estimated that removal of tariffs in these two sectors could save our exporters $130 million a year. This does not include the value of any additional exports that free-market access would give our exporters. Apec also does much practical work in the area of trade facilitation -- making it easier for traders to get access to international markets by tackling the maze of red tape that slows up business transactions. It is estimated that around 7 to 10 per cent of total world trade is tied up in unnecessary duplication and bureaucracy. Apec estimates that full implementation of its trade facilitation programmes would save $US46 billion ($86 billion) a year for the region. The Apec process has long recognised the value of including private sector input. The Apec Business Advisory Council (ABAC) reports directly to leaders, and has assumed an important monitoring role within Apec. Each member economy has three representatives in ABAC. New Zealand's representatives in 1998 are Philip Burdon, Kerry McDonald, and Rosanne Meo. Next year Philip Burdon takes the ABAC chair. Our other representatives will be Douglas Myers and Fran Wilde. Another group of New Zealand business people, including some involved in the growing area of Maori enterprises, will also travel to Kuala Lumpur to attend a business summit meeting. Globalisation is largely driven by technological change. Much of Apec's work is devoted to helping member economies deal with the challenges of that change. The value of Apec's work is shown by the commitment of members, and the desire of other economies to join. >From this month the existing 18 member economies will be joined by three new members -- Russia, Vietnam, and Peru. Other economies are queuing up. Following Kuala Lumpur, Prime Minister Jenny Shipley will set out further details of how New Zealand intends to approach its year as chair of Apec. We will be working hard to ensure that progress in Kuala Lumpur provides a solid foundation for New Zealand's Apec year. Don McKinnon is the New Zealand Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade. From panap at panap.po.my Mon Nov 9 14:23:53 1998 From: panap at panap.po.my (PAN Asia Pacific) Date: Mon, 09 Nov 1998 14:23:53 Subject: [asia-apec 865] Free capital flow, market liberalisation has caused damage to women Message-ID: <3119@panap.po.my> PRESS RELEASE BY PESTICIDE ACTION NETWORK - ASIA PACIFIC NEWS AT APPA DATELINE: KUALA LUMPUR 9TH NOVEMBER, 1998 REJECT APEC!!! Free capital flow, market liberalisation has caused damage to women By Suria Prakash & Jennifer Mourin, The Third International Women's Conference Against APEC opened yesterday with a rousing ceremony of more than 150 delegates from over 25 countries around the world expressing their solidarity in their struggle against severe impacts of globalisation on their lives and livelihood. Held at the Hotel Grand Olympic in Kuala Lumpur, delegates from each country lit a lamp, symbolising solidarity, hope and their vision for the future. "This light is a symbol of our solidarity with our sisters and brothers languishing in jails because of their belief and because of their resistance", said Ms Sarojeni Rengam, Executive Director of the Pesticide Action Network Asia & The Pacific, a co-organiser of the conference with Tenaganita. "The light is also our symbol of our hope and of our vision of the future". Representatives from various countries later articulated their vision of the future - a vision of caring and worthy of our children and grandchildren, of empowerment and of women; restoring their lost identity and their crucial roles in producing food and wealth. And of women reshaping the economics of the future. "The next century will be shaped by their vision," … and not by the 'handful of billionaires' in the affluent countries seeking more and more profit for their capital", asserted Vandana Shiva. PERILS OF FREE CAPITAL FLOW Speakers and participants were greatly concerned with the free capital flow, moving across the world with ease, while the trade liberalisation regimes being promoted had caused enough damage to women. This was amply clear by the experiences presented by the delegates. "Globalisation has hit woman the hardest," they echoed. Citing the case of Indonesia, Tati Krishnawaty of Solidaritas Perempuan said globalisation and unemployment had led to massive migration of workers who were "unrecognised" but welcome in "receiving" countries as a source of cheap labour. But these migrant workers were denied basic rights and abused, adding that they were now being sent back home as the receiving countries suffer the backlash of globalisation. "After nine years, what has APEC done? There is only crisis both in the 'receiving' countries and 'host' countries". "In the meantime, back home in Indonesia, the government had unleashed a reign of terror against women struggling for democracy, better livelihood and the right to land. "Globalisation has led to militarisation and the military had used rape as a tool to frighten women and their community fighting who stood up to fight for democracy," she added. Globalisation - greater misery for women Ita Fatia Nadia of Kalyanamitra, echoed this view and said although a large number of women had been raped, in an effort to silence them, patriachal society doesn't simply recognise this fact." In the Philippines, globalisation has led to "greater misery for women, workers and peasants, for indigenous people, and the urban poor". And there is an effort at "mainstreaming of women in the developmental process" in response to their growing militancy, according to Elisa Tita Lubi of GABRIELLA. Bernice See of the Asian Indigenous Women's Network pointed out that mining and hydroelectric projects are taking over land from indigenous people and their land rights are being denied. "Our resources are being taken away…and now, even our genes are being taken away and treated as commodities" she said. In India, "globalisation had caused communalisation and caste riots. And lower caste women are increasingly becoming victims of these riots, basically because they have been asserting their economic and political rights to land, higher wages, etc,." stated Burnad Fatima of the Society for Rural Education and Development. "Caste riots are taking away land rights from women, and we have to fight against globalisation as well as the revival of fundamentalism", she said. This revival of fundamentalism is common to other countries in the region, added Nimalka Fernando of Sri Lanka. UNITE TO RESIST GLOBALISATION With this international trend going unabated, Irene Fernandez of Tenaganita said everyone must come together to resist globalisation. "We must come together in a concrete way," she said. But while national and international agendas are important, we must give importance to regional agendas. "The people's resistance movements within certain countries experiencing political crisis and current economic downturn are being led by fundamentalist groups. This is something we must resist as the backlash will result in more suffering for women , which is already bring experienced in the region." In describing the conference, Irene explained that the women were coming together to sharpen their perspectives in order to work more effectively in their own communities. "Women need to work towards genuine democracy and better economics, under the will of the people". From rverzola at phil.gn.apc.org Tue Nov 10 07:45:02 1998 From: rverzola at phil.gn.apc.org (Roberto Verzola) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1998 07:45:02 Subject: [asia-apec 866] papers online, please Message-ID: <199811110119.JAA00098@phil.gn.apc.org> May I repeat my request to the APPA and its various track organizers to post working papers, documents, speeches (in so far as the files are available) on this list. We who can't go to KL for financial or other reasons would also like to listen in to the various discussions and debates. Regards to all, and good luck to the organizers and participants of APPA! Obet Verzola Philippine Greens From panap at panap.po.my Tue Nov 10 10:41:24 1998 From: panap at panap.po.my (PAN Asia Pacific) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1998 10:41:24 Subject: [asia-apec 867] Women Challenge Globalization and the Erosion of Food Security. Message-ID: <3131@panap.po.my> Feed the People! Women Challenge Globalization and the Erosion of Food Security. By Suria Prakash and Jennifer Mourin Delegates to the Third International Women's Conference Against APEC at Kuala Lumpur today called for active resistance to globalisation in agriculture - calling on the development of alternatives, including alternative strategies, vision and leadership, which will provide food security at the household and community levels for all. At the workshop on Land, Food Security and Agriculture, they said globalisation that is being driven by APEC and other free-trade caucuses, has destroyed food security in Asian countries, hitting women the hardest. "As national and transnational agri-business corporations take over food production and distribution, this has further marginalized women's role in agriculture, and destroyed their knowledge and skills. Women are now much worse off as farm workers: where once they were decision-makers and active participants, women are now being increasingly pushed into the informal sector undertaking jobs such as weeding, etc.", stated Sarojeni V. Rengam of the Pesticide Action Network (PAN) Asia and the Pacific. To develop sustainable agriculture and provide food security, the workshop demanded that women have better access to land, seeds, water and other resources. But the struggle for food security, and sustainable agriculture, needs to confront not only the interests and institutions involved in the new globalized agriculture, but also patriarchal systems. Systems represented in its extreme form in some countries by militarization of the State, which dominates all levels of society. Which means, the workshop noted, women should develop alternative leadership to reflect the whole range of problems that women faced, and to work towards building a better, more egalitarian and gender-just society. Several delegates discussed the problems of food security in their own countries, and how alternatives are being developed. In the Philippines, where landlessness is a major problem, globalisation has worsened the situation. Large tracks of land are being converted to 'high- value' export crops, industrial zones, tourist resorts, golf courses, mining projects, etc. Land conversion is eroding the capacity of the farmers to produce their own food. And food security at the household level, and national food security, is being met with food imports. "The Estrada administration had vowed to give priority to food security,… but the directive in which it is actually going is alarming," said Carmen Buena of AMIHAN. "Peasants have lost their land, and the cry for land remains a dream; there is massive starvation and poverty among peasants because of increasing landlessness". In India, "the new colonialism in the form of structural adjustment Programmes is further undermining the already fragile livelihoods of Dalit (community of women belonging to 'untouchable' low castes who are extremely impoverished) and tribal women. The current rhetoric of women’s rights are women’s emancipation, economic as well as social, promoted by government officials and political leaders hides the dismal conditions in which Dalit women continue to live", stated Dr Rukmini Rao, of the Deccan Development Society, Hyderabad, India. Oppressed and exploited, these women are now beginning to fight back to regain their livelihoods and dignity. Dr Rao cited an example of how Dalit women in one of the districts (Medak in the southern state of Andhra Pradesh) in India were organising themselves into women's sanghas (groups) to carry out their struggles. "The women oppose the ethic of competition and individualism and, collectively, they are demonstrating the power of sharing one caring", she said. "To ensure immediate food security for themselves, they have set up grain banks and also taken several steps to create sustainable life-styles". These steps include setting up seed banks to confront multinational seed companies; social forestry programmes to revive degraded lands (creating also employment and additional resources such as fuel wood and fodder); alternative health care system; promotion of organic agriculture; and values of democracy and gender equity. "Through their actions, Dalit women have demonstrated an alternative path to development and self-reliance in opposition to the values and strategies promoted by world elite through international organisations and multi-national corporations". "The erosion of community power in the face of encroaching and centralising forces beyond the control of the peasantry is, in fact, a political issue to the farmers", according to Farhad Mazhar of UBINIG, Bangladesh. The Nayakrishi Andolan (New Agricultural Movement) is therefore challenging conventional centralised agricultural practices with the promotion of alternatives, as an initiative of the peasants of Bangladesh. Their alternative and integrated agricultural practices do away with chemical pesticides, and involve agro-forestry, livestock and poultry, fish culture and conservation of water, seeds and genetic resources at the household and community levels. "But Nayakrishi is not just a matter of introducing new agricultural technology based on nature-friendly organic methods," says Farhad. "Neither is it an ecological or an environmental movement in a narrow, elitist and 'official' sense - its objective is to transform and reconstruct the community on new relations and values. It is an effort to create new visions for a mode of living". In this, the experiential knowledge of farmers is critical, he says. Meanwhile, agro-chemical companies are adapting new strategies to promote chemical-based food production as the sole solution to meet the world’s food needs – without considering how food is distributed. This by itself cannot solve the problem, and "we must continue to assert the importance of access to and distribution of food", said Barbara Dinham of the Pesticide Trust, United Kingdom. "Top pesticide companies now control 80% of the agro-chemical sales, and there is growing integration with seed companies, particularly by Novartis, Monsanto, Zeneca and Du Pont. These agro-chemical companies assert that they can feed the world, insist that pesticides can be used safely, and promote pesticide management as integrated pest management (IPM)." These strategies need to be challenged and countered. The workshop recommended that every country should develop a national plan for food security that incorporates commitment to growing certain healthy percentage of national food production needs. Governments should also be pressed to implement national plans for food security. Other recommendations included: Campaigns to remove the Agreement on Agriculture from the WTO's purview; these campaigns should also push for the removal of subsidies in U.S. and European agriculture. Promotion of national food security debates and campaigns. Demonstration of the 'multi-functional nature of agriculture'. Campaigns to encourage people to eat local and to develop and support the local economy. Campaigns against the loss of agricultural biodiversity. Revival of indigenous knowledge, and its protection from TNCs. Development of hunger maps as recommended at the World Food Summit. Assertion of the practise of sustainable agriculture as a resistance to the globalization of agriculture. Documentation of the effects of liberalization, as being pushed by trade blocks like APEC, including the impact of structural adjustment on agriculture and rural livelihoods. - end - From panap at panap.po.my Tue Nov 10 10:49:14 1998 From: panap at panap.po.my (PAN Asia Pacific) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1998 10:49:14 Subject: [asia-apec 868] Statement of the Third Women's Conference Against APEC Message-ID: <3132@panap.po.my> Statement of the Third Women's Conference Against APEC 8-9 November, 1998, Kuala Lumpur Women Resist Globalisation! Assert Women's Rights As we enter into the millennium, we, 182 women from 22 countries representing 104 organizations met in Kuala Lumpur to Resist Globalization and Assert Our rights. In the last two days we have listened to the voices of peasant women, migrant workers, farmers, indigenous peoples, the "dalit" people, fisher folks and 22 countries on the impact of economic liberalization, deregulation and privatisation on our lives. Women suffer most from globalization in Asia where the economic crisis has brought massive unemployment and displacement. This has resulted in increased impoverishment and poverty. Food security is threatened by loss of biodiversity and loss of knowledge, the new fast expansion of genetic engineering and the dumping of agricultural surplus from Northern countries. The appropriation of land and water resources by large TNCs and the elite has led to the disintegration, displacement and marginalisation of large numbers of rural and indigenous communities. Women now enter in exploitative working conditions in industries, wage worker, domestic work, migrant, sex workers. They are deprived of legal protection, health care, and safe working conditions, work security and the right to organize. The Asian crisis has shown us the collapse and contradiction and the ugly side of speculative financial management. While the G7 governments have bailed out their Wall Street cronies and Asian leaders are bailing out their cronies, workers who have contributed to the economic growth are retrenched and migrant workers forcefully deported, often without their rightful wages and their resistance met with repression for example, Indonesian and Bangladesh migrant workers in Malaysia. Our defense budgets continue to swell and the military is used to repress dissent of workers, indigenous communities, ethnic minorities, democracy movements, peasants and students. Women have faced extreme forms of violence and rape is used as tools of subjugation. Privatisation of health care is a violation of women's basic human rights to total well-being by denying them access to safe, appropriate, affordable, high quality preventive and curative health care. It also commodifies reproductive health needs. The population control policies and methods together with the dumping of harmful and experimental contraceptives have increased the risks to women's lives. Privatisation and commercialization of education increases the cost of education resulting in mass drop-outs and add to the mass unemployment. WE SAY NO TO GLOBALIZATION TNCs with the support of governments are the prime movers of globalization and benefit from it, they have consolidated their power and control to expand their wealth and profits through: Monopolies · distribution of patented, non-germinating (terminator technology) and high input seeds · the appropriation of land, knowledge, natural resources · patent systems enforced through TRIPS · deregulation of labour (through contractualization and casualisation) and land ownership · the creation and existence of regional growth triangles and corridors The mergers of seed, agrochemical, pharmaceuticals and food corporation as well as financial institutions to consolidate their power and create conditions for global corporate control. The financial speculation and currency trading which has resulted in the collapse and devaluation various currencies. Multilateral agencies, WTO, World Bank and IMF and the regional trade blocs, NAFTA, APEC, SAFTA, MERCOSUR, and the European Union are the main exponents of globalization. Our governments, local elite and local business are the collaborators and implementers of this agenda. The rise of dangerous anti globalization forces based on narrow, chauvinistic nat6ionalism has intensified social conflicts and the politics of caste, race and religion has led to the revival and strengthening of fundamentalism that encourages division and violence especially for women as in the case of Dalit women in India. Often these conflicts divert us from basic problems. State is the direct perpetrator of violence against women. The state continues to protect both private and public institutions and agencies for example, global capital, TNCs, its own armed forces and fundamentalist forces. WE RESIST GLOBALISATION AND ASSERT OUR RIGHTS We resist and reject APEC. We resist WTO agreements and call for its dismantling. We reject attempts to legitimise WTO through proposals for social and environmental clauses. In particular we will work towards the removal of the agricultural agreements from GATT/WTO and patents on life forms through TRIPS. We resist World Bank and IMF conditionalities and condemn the bailouts of private companies and financial institutions. We resist patenting of all life forms and privatisation water and natural resources, land, and knowledge. We assert the rights enshrined in UN Instruments particularly n - The right to freedom of association, expression, and assembly. n - Right to equality n freedom from all forms of discrimination We assert the right to take control over our bodies and our sexuality We assert freedom from violence and the principles defined in the UN Declaration on VAW. We assert the right to food security, sustainable livelihoods and the right to land. We assert the rights of indigenous people and ethnic groups to self-determination MORE AND MORE WOMEN HAVE TAKEN THE STRUGGLE AGAINST GLOBALIZATION Women organize at all levels. Women's movements should increasingly be that of workers, peasants, indigenous peoples, the urban poor and fisherfolk. Youth and students organize at all levels and forward the struggle. Political education, information campaigns, awareness raising programs should promote women-centred and people-centred actions, backed up with research and documentation the results of which should be published to reach many. Conduct mass campaigns, demonstrations and various other women's actions against liberalization, deregulation and privatization; inclusion of agriculture in WTO; labor and sex trafficking; deportation, contract violations, reduction in wages and sexual and physical abuse of migrant women; mass lay-offs, insecurity of tenure, low wages and miserable working conditions of women in factories and service sectors; displacement from land of rural and indigenous women; tuition fee increases and sexual harassment on campus; rape and all other forms of violence against women; insufficient women's health services and violation of women's reproductive rights; and state repression and violence through militarisation. Continue the resistance through women creative action such as through mass campaigns, political actions. Create community level alternatives such as seed bank, micro enterprises, cooperatives, crisis centers, sharing of knowledge, pushing for genuine land reform, monitoring and documenting the practices of TNCs, governments, powerful patriarchal groups that violate our rights, etc. Unite and integrate women's actions with the democratic, progressive and militant people's movements and labour movements from different countries based on equality and mutual respect to advance the cause of grassroots and other women in all other movements. Seek different levels of alliances with other groups to get their support for women's initiatives. Have more women leaders and activists, especially from the grassroots, to strengthen women's participation and leadership in the political and social life of the community and the country. We should actively participate in the electoral process in campaign as well as candidates. Build international solidarity against imperialist globalization through sharing of information and common actions. Lobby governments, UN agencies for the ratification of all instruments including ILO Conventions that will protect and promote civil, political, social, economic and cultural rights. We demand complete transparency and accountability from multilateral agencies, TNCs and financial institutions. PLAN OF ACTION - Campaign for the removal of agricultural agreement and patents on life forms from the GATT/WTO. - Campaign for the ratification of the UN Convention on Migrant Workers and the rights of their families, 1990. Campaign for bilateral agreements for the protection of the rights of migrant workers. - Campaign to remove all conditionalities imposed by IMF/World Bank. - Campaign against the monopoly of seed and agrochemical companies especially Monsanto, Novartis and Cargill that threatens food security at the household. - Campaign against the privatisation of Basic amenities and health. - Monitor the health and environmental hazards of pesticides and campaign against their production and use. - Campaign against mining, and building of dams and agrobussiness that destroys indigenous communities and their lands. - Strengthen the public health system and promote community based health practices to ensure women's health and reproductive rights and children's health rights are met. Prevent the further privatisation of essential health services and change the marketing practices of TNCs (pharmaceuticals, pesticides, and baby foods) - Campaign for the establishment of standard minimum rules by the UN for the treatment and promotion of the rights of trafficked women. - Campaign for the ratification and implementation of the CEDAW and for the adoption of the proposed optional protocol for CEDAW. Monitor and document violations. - Campaign against militarisation; and the violence, abuse and brutality committed and bring to justice the perpetrators. Organize regional activities on November 25 - the International Day of Violence against women specifically on the theme of militarisation and violence against women. From oppenh at theory.physics.ubc.ca Tue Nov 10 17:07:29 1998 From: oppenh at theory.physics.ubc.ca (Jonathan Oppenheim) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1998 00:07:29 -0800 (PST) Subject: [asia-apec 869] Jean's trip to Malaysia Message-ID: <199811100807.AAA02997@theory.physics.ubc.ca> Here is a copy of the "Dear Jean" letter sent to our Prime Minister by the Group Formerly known as APEC Alert ----- Begin Included Message ----- >From alert@interchange.ubc.ca Tue Nov 10 00:02:47 1998 From: APEC Alert! Reply-To: APEC Alert! To: pm@pm.gc.ca cc: axworl@parl.gc.ca, apecalert-l Subject: Your Trip to Malaysia Dear Jean, We, the Group Formerly Known as APEC Alert salute you, Canada's grande fromage and chief capitalist ding-dong. We wish you well on your trip to the APEC Summit in Malaysia. We know how excited you must be to attend such a distinguished photo-op and big business schmooze-fest. You must really be looking forward to once again shaking hands with your fellow despots. It has been almost a year since you got to hang with your old golfing buddies, and you must really miss them. And speaking of golf, we hear that Kuala Lumpur has some of the best-kept greens in the worlds. How wonderful for you to be able to go a few rounds with such seasoned golf pros as Bill Clinton and Jiang Zemin. As Canada's chief travelling salesman and corporate cheerleader, we hope your junket will not only be pleasurably, but also profitable. "Deals! Deals! Deals!" Corporate Canada must be just as excited as we are. We would also like to congratulate you on your recent human rights coup. We hear that you will be seated next to the President of Malaysia, and will use this opportunity to whisper a few words to him about your jailed boy-toy Anwar. What a great way to capitalize on those many APEC coffee breaks. Your people at public relations are just brilliant! This simple, seemingly insignificant gesture might finally put an end to those accusations about you being a bit of a thug (we know it hurts Jean, but someone had to say it). Perhaps if Billy Clinton is seated on your other side, you may be tempted to make some comments about brother Mumia. While he is facing execution, you must remember not to go too far. We sincerely hope that any remarks you make will be subtle. Remember tact Jean. I know it's not your strong point but we wouldn't want any minor details to spoil the APEC agenda. We really can't afford to lose any of those sources of cheap labor, or those deliciously lax environmental regulations. You haven't been yourself lately and we can't have you shooting from the hip on this one. So, don't forget to pack your batik underwear and toothbrush, and good luck prying open those markets! Love, The Group Formerly Known as APEC Alert P.S. Please have a safe stay while attending the Summit. We hear that demonstrations there can really get out of hand. Perhaps you should acquaint Malaysian security with proper baseball bat technique. Hit another homer for us Jean! P.P.S. By the way, sorry about all that revolution-n-stuff last APEC. We were just kidding. ----- End Included Message ----- From appasec at tm.net.my Wed Nov 11 18:57:45 1998 From: appasec at tm.net.my (APPA) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1998 17:57:45 +0800 Subject: [asia-apec 870] News & stories from Asia Pacific Peoples' Assembly Message-ID: <19981111095953.QYR14182@[202.188.72.37]> Following are the highlights of the past 2 days of the Asia Pacific Peoples' Assembly. We will be updating you with the latest through our news bulletin called THE RAGE. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: listserv notice.txt Type: application/octet-stream Size: 66139 bytes Desc: listserv notice (Text Document) Url : http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/private/asia-apec/attachments/19981111/ef4b6562/listservnotice.bin From appasec at tm.net.my Thu Nov 12 17:06:45 1998 From: appasec at tm.net.my (APPA) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1998 16:06:45 +0800 Subject: [asia-apec 871] News & Stories from Asia Pacific Peoples' Assembly (Part 2) Message-ID: <19981112081415.CKYT5403@[202.188.24.52]> THE RAG (Resistance Against Globalisation) APPA Daily Bulletin No. 4, Thursday, November 12, 1998 (Page 4 to Page 6) WORKERS OF THE WORLD ... Labour Forum report Fifty-six participants from Malaysia, Korea, the Philippines, Pakistan, Australia, New Zealand, Singapore, Thailand, Mexico, Hong Kong and Indonesia attended the Labour Forum. In their presentation "Key Trends of the Workers' Movement in the Asia-Pacific Region?" Bong Angelus and his colleagues identified an emerging "flexibilisation, informalisation and intensification" of labour. The immediate effects were lay-offs, adjustment of working hours, "casualisation" of labour and short-term hiring, increased use of on-the-job training, withdrawal of regular employees' benefits, age discrimination, exposure to health and safety hazards, and loss of social benefits. The groups most vulnerable to these were women and migrant workers. Participants then divided into three discussion groups to produce the following reports on women workers, trade unions and the non-formal/community sector. Women workers The impact of globalisation on women workers (with migrants being the hardest hit) are: - the rampant use of labour flexibilisation schemes (i.e. contracting, sub-contracting, agency-hiring and job rotation); - low and reduced wages; - massive lay-offs, non-implementation of benefits; - harassment of women unionists and blacklisting for employment in the industrial zones; - discrimination in hiring and at the workplace; - increase of violence against women at work and at home; - racially divisive tactics against women and migrants; - strict limitations on the right to organise and to strike; - limited access to social services such as education for children and healthcare; - increase in work hazards at work because of cost-cutting measures, privatisation of public services; and - deregulation and liberalisation of the economy. Furthermore, though cases lodged by workers against employers are tolerated by the government, most lose in legal battles. Flexibility leads to decreased space for organising, a fact that is not helped by governments that are rampantly pro-business and anti-labour. Increased domination of economies by TNCs, financial institutions, the IMF and the World Bank leaves governments weak, consequently increasing difficulties for workers and their institutions. The pressure of globalisation leads workers to look for scapegoats, increasing attacks on migrants and women, neglecting families. Women workers are demanding that the gains made by the working class in the past are defended and reappropriated. They are asking for their right to organise, strike and bargain collectively. They should also have job security (no contract work), just wages, improved working conditions (no night shift and other irregular hours), improved health and safety conditions; the right to affordable and quality child-care, the right to training, affirmative action to promote working women, policies and actions to stop sexual harassment, and the removal of all discriminatory laws and policies against working women (such as income tax, citizenship laws, unemployment support, etc). To these ends, a signature campaign will be held to raise awareness of the issues of working women. A red ribbon/scarf campaign on March 8, 1999 to protest that appropriation of the gains of working women by the forces of globalisation and a campaign to demand the restoration of the right to organise, to strike and to bargain collectively are also planned. Trade unions Globalisation has brought about attacks on trade unions and repressive labour laws have made them less effective. Privatisation destroys trade unions and jobs and creates a lack of accountability. There is a loss of national sovereignty, with the social impact of homelessness and poverty. Moreover, standards in labour and the environment are lowered, industries are closed and the vulnerability of migrant workers exposed. To assert labour rights, trade unions have to build their strength in local organisations and campaign for the enforcement of the International Labour Organisation (ILO) Labour Charter. Other strategies are to organise a consumer boycott of TNC products and promote worker exchange visits. Collaborations with community groups and NGOs on issues like privatisation or student problems will be held; so too negotiate with TNCs to reach labour agreements. Workers' demands will be included in international trade treaties, links between meetings of APPA consolidated, the ILO code of conduct for TNCs and joint country union negotiations held. Non-formal/community sector The non-formal sector consists of petty traders, self-employed craftspeople and workers who are casual, flexible and unorganised. However, the workshop discussion only focused on the non-formal labour rather than the entire sector. Non-formal labour differs from formal labour only in terms of working conditions and not where each works. The expanding globalisation is increasing the informal sector which then depresses wages in the formal sector. Thus, it is important that there is a concerted effort to organise non-formal workers on livelihood and community issues, as well as links with the formal union organisations. We also need to revive the collectivist feelings and to defend the present gains of the labour movement by protecting jobs and halting the erosion of social services. The current recession is an opportunity for the labour movement to question the type of development and the values behind it (such as the equation of economic success with development). There is also a need to assess the impact on the environment, people and workers, as well as a need for an international labour collaboration. WORKERS ON THE MOVE The 4th International Migrant Workers Forum on APEC The migration of workers from less developed countries is increasing due to globalisation which has resulted in joblessness in less developed countries and investment in developing countries. The process of liberalisation is in fact regulating the free flow of human resources. Capital flight by multinational companies is not questioned while a ban is placed on workers remitting money home. While migrant workers are being retrenched and sent home, Malaysia will be recruiting 120,000 new migrants (Renong needs more migrant workers for construction). The privatisation of health care has resulted in migrants paying first class price for third class treatment. Multinationals are continuing with overproduction when the distribution is lop-sided. Migrant workers end up being a big market for their products. Migrant workers become undocumented as a result of the activities of unscrupulous crooks at both ends who are only concerned with minting money at the cost of the migrant workers. Poverty, vulnerability, freedom and language barriers as well as the lack of support groups for migrant workers are a problem. Three workshops were conducted and the following are two recommended strategies for NGOs and migrant worker groups to address "The crisis of rights for migrant workers and their families": 1) Encouraged continued dialogue with local unions for a common platform. 2) Act on issues against mass deportation of migrant workers through a signature campaign and by monitoring mass deportation activities. It was decided that a letter of concern regarding the Hong Kong Salary/Wage cut should be signed by everyone at the migrant workers forum, and a letter of concern urging the Malaysian authorities to stop mass deportation of Indonesians be drafted. In the discussion concerning "The quality of life of migrant workers and their families", the education of migrant workers was seen as necessary to enable them to deal with the authorities when making demands from the government. Also, it is important to adopt or implement rational protection laws for migrants. Another suggestion was to utilise formal and informal channels for public education by involving migrants themselves to speak out about the realities of migration. APPA SAYS "NO" TO US MILITARY PRESENCE Capitol Hotel, Wed: People from different parts of Asia, namely South Korea, Taiwan, Japan, the Philippines, Malaysia and Indonesia, gathered to discuss the US-Japan militarist agenda, and to reaffirm their unity against the iron fists ? the US-Japan security alliance ? that shield globalisation from the people's resistance. The two superpowers in the region are now strenghtening co-operation under the newly signed Security Cooperation Guidelines to oppress the growing people's resistance against imperialist globalisation. In the roundtable discussion, participants from Korea and Taiwan made reports about the two nations still divided by US interventions and military presence. Through a very informative presentation by delegates from Japan and a paper from the US, the forum was able to deepen its understanding of the latest developments in the US as well as Japanese imperialist designs to dominate the region. Indonesian participants exposed US military interventions in Indonesia, especially before and after the upsurge of the pro-democracy movement. In the Philippines, US troops are plotting to return through the Visiting Forces Agreement (VFA) despite strong opposition from the people. This follows 1991?s rejection of US military bases in the Philippines which ended 93 years of US military presence in that country. Since then, the US has been keen to re-establish its military presence in the region, substituting the term "military bases" with "visiting forces". Its intentions remain unchanged: the VFA is imperative to the United States' "forward deployment" and "prepositioning" strategy that serves as the military back-up to the imposition of "free market" globalisation in the Asia-Pacific region. It is an opportunity for the US to re-establish its military presence in the region, thereby threatening the peace, security and sovereignty of the people of the Philippines and Asia-Pacific. THE RAG RETURNS After two issues as The RAGE, The RAG is back, minus the "E" but just as empowered. The RAG was the original name for the APPA news bulletin and remains so. If you wish to read more, feel free to drop your opinions, observations of APPA so far, feedback, comments, jokes, gossip ... anything to make The RAG bigger and brighter. If you want to help out, even better! We need reporters, photographers, writers and proof reader. Forum documenters, take note: please get your forum reports in early, by 8pm of the same day for inclusion in the next day's issue of The RAG. Remember, this is a daily news bulletin to keep everyone informed of what has been going on. It is not an annual report. So please DO NOT send minutes of your respective forums! The RAG is located at the Media Centre (next to the Secretariat) at the Federal Hotel. CORPORATE WATCH SEEKS INFO Transnational Resource & Action Center (TRAC), the US-based NGO working to build global links for human rights, environmental justice, and democratic control over corporations, is interested in receiving specific information on corporate activity from APPA participants. Contact Amit Srivastava in person (by phone 243 7000 - Room 1808), or e-mail (amit@igc.org), or you can drop off materials at Capitol Hotel (Room 1808) until Nov 15. GATHERING FOR PEACE AND FREEDOM In memory of those who died in the 1991 Dili Massacre, East Timor On Nov 12, 1991, the Republic of Indonesia Armed Forces committed mass murder of the people of East Timor who were peacefully demonstrating for freedom from Indonesia. In the massacre, 271 people died, 382 were injured and 250 simply disappeared. Among those who died on that day was a Malaysian student named Kamal Bamadhaj who was then 21 years old. and the launch of the campaign to free Xanana Gusmao In the opinion of the people of East Timor, Xanana Gusmao is their true leader. He was caught in 1992 after fighting in the jungles of East Timor since Indonesia annexed the country in 1975. Xanana Gusmao is now incarcerated at Penjara Cipinang, Jakarta, where he is undergoing a 20-year jail sentence. Gusmao?s release will enable a fair peace accord for East Timor, and will bring the peace that the Timorese have long awaited. 7.30pm Thursday, November 12, 1998 In front of the Indonesian Embassy, Jalan Tun Razak Anyone wishing to play acoustic musical instruments for the vigil can contact Nadia at the APPA Secretariat, Tel : 2482464 Organised by Solidaritas Timor Timur Malaysia ASIA-PACIFIC PEOPLE'S SOLIDARITY ASSEMBLY The people's call to APEC leaders to: Uphold human rights and justice Reject globalisation and exploitation We invite people from all walks of life to come together as a sign of protest against tyranny. 11am, November 15, 1998 (in front of Suria KLCC) Please wear a white ribbon as a symbol of justice. From appasec at tm.net.my Thu Nov 12 17:07:49 1998 From: appasec at tm.net.my (APPA) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1998 16:07:49 +0800 Subject: [asia-apec 872] News & Stories from Asia Pacific Peoples' Assembly (Part 1) Message-ID: <19981112081433.CKYY5403@[202.188.24.52]> THE RAG (Resistance Against Globalisation) APPA Daily Bulletin No. 4, Thursday, November 12, 1998 (Page 1 to Page 3) POLICE HARASS CONFERENCE Squatter visit disrupted by police intimidation Sentul, Wednesday: APPA participants who travelled to Chubadak Village, Sentul, to visit a squatter settlement were confronted by police today. The 50 delegates, comprising mainly community leaders and advocates of housing rights, arrived just after 9am to register for the forum on urban poor at the village's community hall when two police cars appeared. A chief inspector with a name tag "Ali" approached the organisers demanding to know what the meeting was about. Forum co-ordinator Rahim Ishak explained that the forum was being held in conjunction with APPA to discuss globalisation and its impact on the people. He also explained that it was a "closed door" meeting and that delegates were there by invitation only. By this time, Chief Inspector "Ali" started looking impatient and, acting arrogantly, tried to grab the registration list from an APPA volunteer. The volunteer managed to pull the list away from "Ali" who then threatened to arrest the volunteers if they did that to him again. He then called his superior "Fawzy" who arrived an hour later. The forum was allowed to go on so long as there were no plans to have any outdoor activities. The police remained until 4pm when the deputy OCPD by the name of Haji Jaafar arrived and questioned Rahim on the objectives of the forum. Rahim once again explained that it was within the ambits of the law. Haji Jafaar informed Rahim that the police were acting on a complain by villagers that there might be trouble. The police left at 5.30pm when the delegates left, but had managed to delay the forum's proceedings and prevent the delegation from visiting a squatter community in order to understand the issues better. In a press release later, the APPA Organising Committee protested strongly against the unwarranted police harrassment and demanded an explanation for the stationing of a policeman outside the hall when the participants were merely exercising their right to assemble peacefully at a closed-door meeting. "This form of harassment was completely unnecessary and unwarranted. The meeting was by special invitation only. We deplore this act as it is tantamount to instilling fear among the people," said Cynthia Gabriel, APPA co-ordinator. IS GLOBALISATION COMPATIBLE WITH HUMAN RIGHTS? Delegates differ in opinion ............ Federal Hotel, Wed: After an uneventful start, the Human Rights Forum burst into life in the afternoon session "Human Rights and Globalisation - Are They Compatible?" John Kellock (Amnesty International) argued that the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) provides the blocks upon which the globalisation process should be built, and which guarantee the right of individuals and organisations to participate freely in the process of globalisation. "The task we face is to make globalisation work for us all, to make it a rights based process which benefits us all, that brings us together not further apart, that respects all our differences yet affirms what is common to us all," he said in his paper. "I would like to say that the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and globalisation are not only compatible but mutually re-inforcing." Other participants disagreed. Ross Daniels (Queensland University of Technology, Australia) said that "globalisation is incompatible with human rights because it is reinforcing and deepening relative power and inequities." Debbie Stothard (Altsean-Burma) felt the title of the discussion itself was a red herring. "The global movement for human rights is not necessarily part of the globalisation process. The fight for human rights is an on-going one regardless of the era it is in," she added. In a fiery presentation, Ross accused multinational or transnational corporations (TNCs) of being the main force behind globalisation over the last couple of decades. "In light of the comparative power shift from states to TNCs, it is imperative that the human rights movement focus its attention on non-state actors," he said, labelling TNCs "devils". The forum continues tomorrow. FOREST ACTIVISTS PLAN GLOBAL ACTION News from the Environment and Forestry Forum YMCA, Brickfields, Wed: Forest activists from around the Pacific Rim outlined their concerns about globalisation and its impact on forest ecosystems and communities. They discussed their opposition to the pressure by some APEC countries ? especially the US and Canada - to move forward its plans for deregulation of the timber trade through the "Early Voluntary Sectoral Liberalisation" (EVSL) process, despite opposition from forest-dependent communities; the lack of an assessment of the deregulation's environmental, social, and cultural impacts; and APEC's undemocratic discussion of the forest trade deregulation. Participants also reported on their struggles against globalisation around the Asia-Pacific region. They heard about the struggles to obtain indigenous land rights in Sarawak, to protect the last ancient forests of the US Pacific Northwest, to prevent the logging and burning of Russian Far East forests by foreign companies, to stop the IMF's and World Bank's destructive plans to develop palm oil plantations in Indonesia, and to conserve the last remaining native forests of Western Australia. The forest session participants talked about the importance of indigenous land rights and respecting indigenous people's knowledge about forest stewardship, gender and forestry issues, issues with certification of sustainable forestry, and the danger of misusing "sustainable development" terms by government and corporations to subvert communities' rights to forest management. Forest activists also talked about how to work together and build a strong Pacific Rim network of forest activists that will stand up to APEC's forest deregulation plans and other threats to the region's forests. They discussed how to work together between countries to track transnational corporations that are moving around the world to destroy forest ecosystems, such as US companies in Chile, Japanese companies in Canada, and a Malaysian company in the Russian Far East. The environment and forestry forum continues tomorrow at the YMCA, where forest activists will develop a statement opposing APEC's timber trade deregulation plans and discuss common strategies for building a Pacific Rim network. GENETIC ENGINEERING ERODES FOOD SECURITY, ENSLAVES FARMERS By Suria Prakash and Jennifer Mourin Hotel Grand Olympic, Tues: Pesticide Action Network (PAN) Asia and the Pacific's Safe Food Campaign 1998 were launched at the APPA Land, Food Security and Agriculture Forum in Kuala Lumpur by a panel of scientists, health, environmental and consumer activists. The theme of the campaign, "Say NO! to Genetic Engineering in agriculture and food production", aimed to debunk corporate propaganda that genetic engineering was the panacea for all our food needs into the next century. There is ever increasing evidence that this technology has more problems than solutions for us all. Launching the campaign, Sarojeni Rengam said: "Genetically engineered foods involves too many problems and unresolved issues, and these issues are of concern to the whole of Asia. This is because more and more genetically engineered foods are being imported into Asian countries, ostensibly to meet the food needs of the region. "We can feed ourselves without genetically engineered foods," she said. "It is an unnecessary technology. Our farmers do not want it, our consumers do not need it." Only agrochemical and seed corporations will benefit from it. PAN Asia and the Pacific is collaborating with its network partners in the region to carry out this campaign. "Growing concern over these 'miracle' foods and the lack of information has prompted coordinated action over this issue," said Jennifer Mourin, campaign coordinator. "Corporate dominance of our food production is being propelled by trade liberalisation via trade blocks like APEC, and free trade agreements like GATT. This calls for concerted action against genetically engineered foods in the region." The panel of experts, which included Dr. Vandana Shiva, Dr. Micheal Hansen, Dr. Romeo Quijano, Barbara Dinham and Mika Iba, talked about how genetically engineered food was being forced upon countries by corporations and the various issues involved. Dr. Vandana Shiva said Monsanto, which was the biggest player in the game, is the "worst global terrorist." It is forcing the "hazardous food" on all countries, using tremendous pressure and misleading promotional campaigns. Monsanto has, in fact, "held the US Food and Drug Administration captive," she stated. "It is a terrorist in not allowing people to have the food they want, by refusing to segregate genetically engineered food crops and to label genetically engineered foods. And through force, coercion and terror, Monsanto is trying to control the world's food production. We must try to make the food system more democratic by relating closely with farmers." She also said that, significantly, insurance companies were refusing to cover liability on genetically engineered foods, which is a reflection of its safety. The trade agreements do not talk about liabilities. "We must force the exporting countries to accept liabilities. If there is no liability, there is no trade or biosafety protocol, either". Dr. Michael Hansen, of the New York based Consumer Policy Institute warned that genetically engineered foods can cause severe, potentially fatal, allergies. Genetically modified peanuts, dairy products and shellfish were particularly dangerous, and there have been tested cases of allergy from soyabeans. "Without labelling, it is even impossible to trace what food you are reacting to. Europe and India are demanding labelling, and other countries should put pressure. "One of the greatest dangers of genetically engineered foods is the development of antibiotic resistance in consumers because of the antibiotic maker genes used in the process of modifying genes," he said. This is particularly worrisome in the context of the already increasing antibiotic resistance in the case of several infections diseases. Genetically engineered crops could also cause ecological disruptions as the modified genes can cross-over to other, non-engineered crops, creating "superweeds". As resistance to genetically engineered foods mounts in the US and Europe, "there is a danger that it will be dumped on the South," he warned. There are already "significant imports" of soyabean in countries such as Singapore and South Korea. In Europe, anger among the people caused by "mad cow" disease has been stoked further by genetically engineered foods, said Barbara Dinham, of the Pesticides Trust based in London. "There is resistance in Europe because consumers feel genetically engineered foods are unsafe and their effects irreversible." One food chain in England has refused to buy genetically engineered foods. And there are movements opposing the import of genetically engineered foods and the planting of genetically engineered crops, which may force the European Commission to rethink its stand on these issues. Health and environmental activist, Dr. Romeo Quijano pointed out that small and poor farmers in the Asian region will be affected by the monopoly corporate control of genetically engineered seeds through patents. "This will worsen their dependence," he said. "Governments in the region are collaborators in pushing genetically engineered crops. National committees to regulate genetically engineered crops and foods are actually facilitating their entry instead of regulating. And there are no safety or toxicological tests." In Asia, most countries look up to Japan in matters of food issues, but Mika Ika said Japan did not have statutory regulation of genetically engineered foods, and there was also a lack of information. "There are only voluntary safety guidelines, and much of the information comes from Monsanto itself". In fact, the US Department of Agriculture, which has a high stake in promoting genetically engineered foods, had been leading "intensive education" programmes on the safety of genetically engineered foods in Japan. Japanese consumers are now demanding labelling of genetically engineered foods, she said. As part of the Campaign, PAN AP also organised a lecture tour of Dr Hansen to several countries in Asia, including Thailand. One major outcome of his trip there came on Nov 6 when the Thai Biotec Centre admitted that "genetically engineered foods and agricultural products may pose a health hazard". Dr Suthat Sriwathanapong (National Centre for Genetic Engineering and Technology), said to protect consumers against this possible health risk, the Thai Food and Drug Administration should issue a more comprehensive rule to regulate genetically engineered drugs and products. The issues of genetic engineering as a tool of corporate control over our resources, increasing farmers' dependency on foreign technological inputs, and threats to human health and environment will be discussed at the forum on Land, Food Security and Agriculture. From appasec at tm.net.my Thu Nov 12 17:09:32 1998 From: appasec at tm.net.my (APPA) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1998 16:09:32 +0800 Subject: [asia-apec 873] Statement from Aotearoa/New Zealand APEC Monitoring Group Message-ID: <19981112081444.CKZA5403@[202.188.24.52]> STATEMENT FROM AOTEAROA/NEW ZEALAND APEC MONITORING GROUP The Asia-Pacific Peoples Assembly (APPA) in Malaysia should be seen both as a turning point and a new beginning for the direction of the APEC people's fora that began with the NGO Forum on APEC in Osaka, Japan in November 1995. These types of regional fora have served a very useful purpose in uncovering the nature of APEC and developing a peoples response and consolidating the regional peoples opposition to APEC. Events have vindicated our stand as we witness the havoc caused by capital markets on a rampage in so many countries in the region. Faced with a series of crises, the very architects of APEC are now looking to incorporate some of our criticisms as they struggle to find solutions for the problems of international capital. But changed circumstances call for new strategies that go beyond uncovering the nature of the APEC process, which focus on strengthening local and national organisations and struggles, and initiating the process of finding alternatives that emerge from people's experience and struggles. There is a risk that we may get caught up in a round of yearly peoples fora that do not take the process of analysis or action any further but end up being an end in themselves or part of the counter-summit industry. We believe that it may be useful in 3-4 years to meet together again as a regional peoples forum if the APEC process continues, but in the meantime we must concentrate on acting rather than meeting. This does not undermine the worth of regional meetings or exchanges but simply reaffirms our view that our strategies need to change with the changes in circumstances. We from Aotearoa/New Zealand, the country that will be holding the next APEC Leaders Summit, believe that 1999 should be the year where we change our tack in organising opposition to APEC, globalism and neo-liberalism. We believe this for a number of reasons: 1) The regional peoples fora on APEC have now served their usefulness as described above. 2) Aotearoa/New Zealand is a remote part of the region to which it would be very costly to bring large numbers of international participants. 3) The New Zealand Government is attempting to bribe local NGOs there to either support APEC or only make "soft criticism" and is trying to ensure that a "safe" peoples forum is organised in New Zealand in 1999. 4) The 2000 APEC leaders meeting will be held in Brunei and in China in 2001. In both it would be almost impossible to organise any counter activity. 5) If the APEC process stalls in Kuala Lumpur then we could see an early end to the Leader Meetings. We would propose for the next few years: 1) The educational work and oppositional activity to APEC should be organized in all APEC countries on an on-going basis to build local communities' understandings of the connection between APEC and what is happening to them. 2) That coordinated protests in all APEC countries should be organised at the time of each APEC Leaders Summit as long as they exist. 3) That an informal Asia Pacific Peoples Solidarity should be promoted in opposition to the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation. 4) This peoples solidarity should be an on-going and increasing commitment from the people of the region. In particular in 1999 we in Aotearoa/NZ propose: 1) We will organise opposition to APEC and its neo-liberal policies through a year-long education programme, with counter conferences and people's actions at the time of all Senior Officials Meetings, Ministers and Business meetings culminating at the Leaders Meeting of APEC in September 1999. 2) We will invite a small number of international guests to Aotearoa as resource people for these various activities. 3) We will commit ourselves to acting as a coordination point for APEC information and Asia Pacific Peoples Solidarity during 1999 and if required during the year 2000. 4) We will try to integrate the outcomes of other regional peoples initiatives in our activity such as PP21. We seek from APPA 1998 endorsement of our proposals and our offer to coordinate anti-APEC action and education activities for the next 1-2 years. Aotearoa New Zealand APEC Monitoring Group November 1998 From ircalb at swcp.com Fri Nov 13 07:08:02 1998 From: ircalb at swcp.com (Interhemispheric Resource Center) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1998 15:08:02 -0700 Subject: [asia-apec 874] IN FOCUS: APEC Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19981112150802.006c7504@swcp.com> Dear Friends- I hope that this report, released today, will be useful. Please feel free to distribute it to interested parties. Sincerely, Erik Leaver Communications Director Foreign Policy In Focus ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Foreign Policy In Focus: Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation November 1998 Vol. 3, No. 35 Written by John Gershman, Institute for Development Research Edited by Tom Barry (IRC) and Martha Honey (IPS) Key Points o APEC is the largest, most diverse trans-Pacific forum of its kind. o APEC has adopted a declaration that envisions elimination of all trade and investment barriers by 2010 for the wealthiest countries and 2020 for the poorer ones. o APEC is in crisis due to the region's social and economic crisis and the growing opposition to the U.S.-dominated trade and investment liberalization agenda. Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC), founded by a dozen countries in 1989, has become a forum of twenty-one countries that addresses economic issues in the Asia-Pacific region. This diverse group includes the U.S., Canada, China, Taiwan (officially Chinese Taipei), Hong Kong, Japan, Australia, New Zealand, the Philippines, Thailand, Singapore, Indonesia, Malaysia, Brunei, South Korea, Mexico, Papua New Guinea, and Chile. At the November 1998 meeting, three additional countries-Peru, Russia, and Vietnam -will join as full members. Together, the APEC countries account for over 50% of the world's merchandise trade, half the global GNP, and two-fifths of the world population. Operating from a modest secretariat in Singapore, APEC sponsors regular meetings and annual summits of senior government officials and heads of state. APEC operates by consensus rather than through binding agreements and the type of legalism evident in the North American Free Trade Agreement. In this process of "concerted unilateralism," APEC members define broad regional goals but leave the specific aspects of implementation to each nation. APEC consists of three occasionally overlapping processes. The first is economic and technical cooperation promoting economic and human resource development, or "Eco-Tech." Second is trade and investment liberalization, an agenda that emerged at its 1993 meeting when President Clinton invited the 18 APEC leaders to Blake Island, Washington, for the first-ever APEC Economic Leaders Meeting. The Bogor Declaration, adopted in 1994, proclaimed the elimination of all trade and investment barriers by 2010 for APEC's wealthiest countries and 2020 for its poorer ones. Subsequent meetings led to a refinement of these goals in terms of Individual and Collective Action Plans that were to provide the actual liberalization commitments. At the 1997 Vancouver meeting, APEC leaders agreed to liberalize trade in nine sectors on a fast track basis covering $1.5 trillion in trade (known as Early Voluntary Sectoral Liberalization). Those sectors include: chemicals, fisheries, forestry, energy goods and services, environmental goods and services, gems and jewelry, medical equipment, toys, and a telecommunications mutual recognition agreement. Of these, the last was approved in June 1998, while liberalization in fisheries and forestry remain actively resisted by Japan. The third-and weakest-process is the sustainable development agenda, which also emerged within APEC in 1993. To date, this process has been characterized by a flurry of small-scale, capacity-building projects and little else beyond statements of principles and a meeting on marine resources earlier this year. The weakness of the sustainable development agenda has five major causes: poor leadership by the wealthier countries, most prominently the United States; popular opposition to APEC's free trade agenda; the failure to connect the trade, investment, and environmental tracks; the weakness of prosustainable development forces within negotiating governments (most of which are dominated by commercial interests); and the inability of pro-sustainable development forces from civil society to penetrate the national and regional processes of policy formulation. The challenge of working with diverse economies and varying perspectives on trade and investment regulation gives APEC a certain informality and lack of cohesiveness. Although the APEC forum has declared its support for free trade, many members oppose mandatory implementation schedules for comprehensive tariff and quota reduction. Indeed, some countries-principally Malaysia and Japan-have insisted that the liberalization goals be nonbinding and have opposed the U.S. demand that all economic sectors be opened to foreign trade and investment. Countries that oppose the U.S. in its drive to convert APEC into another free trade area would prefer that APEC remain a consultative organization that facilitates technical cooperation on economic matters. Both APEC's inability to develop a positive response to the ongoing Asian crisis and U.S. criticism of recent interventions by Hong Kong, Malaysia, and China in currency and portfolio capital markets set the stage for a clash at the 1998 APEC meeting over the scope of appropriate responses to the economic crisis and the utility of APEC itself. Attention by nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) to APEC has been growing since the first Heads of State Summit in 1993. The Indonesian government blocked a planned NGO forum in 1994, but NGOs success-fully organized parallel summits in 1995 (Osaka), 1996 (Manila), and 1997 (Vancouver) and plan to do so in Kuala Lumpur (1998) and Auckland (1999). Problems With Current U.S. Policy Key Problems o Washington's free trade model for the Asia-Pacific region has met with resistance from countries less enamored by the ideology of economic liberalization and determined to maintain their own development strategies. o U.S. policy in APEC promotes an economic model that downplays human rights and sustainable development. o U.S. policy has focused on enhancing U.S. corporate interests rather than addressing the social and ecological costs of the current economic crisis. Between 1989 and 1992, APEC had a relatively low profile within U.S. foreign economic policy. During that period, NAFTA and the Uruguay Round of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) were Washington's top free trade priorities. The 1993 Seattle APEC meeting, hosted by President Clinton, marked both a higher priority U.S. role in the Asia-Pacific region in general and a more coherently articulated free trade and investment agenda for APEC. Clinton's free trade vision received strong backing from Australia and New Zealand, but other countries-notably Malaysia-were less than enthusiastic. For the U.S. government and business community, APEC offers an opportunity to exercise economic leadership in an important world region. U.S. economic objectives, however, have been at variance with those of a number of the Asian members and with the goals of NGOs that are trying to get a voice at the table in order to raise issues about human rights, labor, and democratization. Washington regards APEC as an instrument to assert its economic liberalization agenda, reduce its merchandise trade deficit with the region, and build a regional free trade bloc with strong U.S. participation, while serving to discourage Asian nations from organizing into an exclusive trading bloc. The Asia-Pacific region has surpassed Western Europe to become America's largest regional trading partner-both as a supplier of U.S. imports and as a customer for its exports. Like NAFTA, APEC is regarded by the U.S. both as a regional bulwark against advances of the European Union and as a lever to strengthen Washington's economic liberalization agenda at the World Trade Organization (WTO). By developing initiatives supported by a significant group of APEC members, the U.S. uses APEC to build a "critical mass" for incorporating its global liberalization agenda into the WTO. Washington has not been entirely successful in promoting its economic goals in the Asia-Pacific region. In the context of the economic crisis, the U.S. trade deficit with the region has been rising, but the U.S. has been able to boost its share of foreign direct investment (FDI) in those countries hardest hit by the crisis. The primary resistance to expanding NAFTA into a hemispheric Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA) comes from opponents within the U.S. who either oppose the free trade agenda or oppose attaching labor and environmental agreements to new trade accords. In the Asia-Pacific region, however, opposition to the U.S. free trade juggernaut comes from both governments and citizens of the region. Although the Clinton administration has succeeded in winning rhetorical commitments to free trade, its proposals for the establishment of a mandatory timetable for the implementation of a free trade area have been consistently rejected. The Clinton administration's continued insistence on liberalization-especially in the face of a massive economic crisis-is widely reviled in the region as a vulture strategy. Rather than trying to address the social costs of the crisis, Washington has focused on pursuing policy reforms that would enable U.S. corporations to pick at the choice carcasses of Asia's economic crisis. The U.S. had harsh words in particular for the 1998 host, Malaysia's Prime Minister Mohamad Mahathir, for his use of capital controls. Washington's narrow economic approach to APEC is problematic. The U.S. argues that economic liberalization, democracy, and security in the region are all mutually reinforcing (forming "three pillars" of foreign policy in Asia). But with the scramble for market share dominating the U.S. agenda, other issues get short shrift. U.S. policy demonstrates no abiding concern for the patterns or effects of either economic growth or crisis in the region, and Washington is a recalcitrant supporter, at best, of the calls for demo-cratic reform from the region's citizens. Absent liberalization, the U.S. has no serious proposals to offer at APEC regarding the economic crisis beyond those already proposed by the G-7. A former member of APEC's Eminent Person's Group, C. Fred Bergsten has proposed that APEC formulate a neo-Keynesian program to spend the $30 billion Japan recently offered the troubled Asian economies. The Japanese, stung after the U.S. denounced a similar plan just over a year ago, are likely to gracefully decline if such a proposal is offered. While the U.S. concentrates on overcoming the objections to what regional leaders see as Washington's agenda for a U.S.-dominated pattern of globalization, other problems raised by U.S. citizen groups and regionally based NGOs receive little attention. A central complaint is that APEC is opaque and undemocratic. As a result, citizen organizations have difficulty raising their concerns about the development process in the Asia-Pacific region. Although the U.S. has raised concerns about human rights and environmental degradation in the region, it still allows its commercial ambitions to overshadow these issues. This is clear in the current U.S. drive for liberalization in forestry and fisheries. Rapid liberalization, in the midst of a massive economic crisis and without regulations insuring sustainable harvests, will only accelerate the region's rates of deforestation and overfishing, already among the world's highest. Toward a New Foreign Policy Key Recommendations o Washington should drop its insistence on comprehensive trade and investment liberalization and recognize the validity of a plurality of development models and priorities. o The U.S. should support initiatives to develop rules for regulating short-term capital flows and to address the social and ecological costs of the current crisis. o The U.S. should insist that APEC become more transparent, participatory, and accountable. As the liberalization locomotive within APEC is stalled and new, large-scale free trade agreements are unpopular at home, Washington could seize the opportunity to pursue a less narrowly focused policy agenda toward APEC. Trying to force liberalization on APEC member states has failed, and maintaining it as the centerpiece of U.S. policy in the region is counterproductive to Washington's stated goals of promoting democracy, equity, and environmentally sustainable development. At a time when even mainstream economists endorse capital controls, U.S. policymakers should rethink their commitment to comprehensive economic liberalization. The conflicts over appropriate responses to the crisis have challenged APEC's raison d'etre. As the world's broadest regional economic institution, APEC is worth preserving if it can do two things: 1) catalyze constructive action on the important regional and global policy issues raised by the current crisis (such as regulating short-term capital flows and addressing the social and ecological costs of the crisis) and 2) move toward a more balanced sustainable development agenda. As first steps, the U.S. could gain support for such an agenda by abandoning its liberalization-for-everyone approach, increasing its support for capacity-building efforts at the national and regional levels, and leading by example at home. U.S. policy should focus simultaneously on improving the transparency of APEC negotiations and on expanding the APEC agenda to include issues of concern to civil organizations other than Chambers of Commerce. Any effort to make the APEC process more transparent and participatory should encourage more citizen involvement at the national level (particularly in the U.S.) in discussions about APEC policy. Also important is the participation of nonbusiness citizen groups at the committee and working-group level. Although the Clinton administration has occasionally included NGO representatives in some U.S. delegations, this sporadic inclusion falls short of the steps needed to open up the U.S. policymaking process. Within APEC, the U.S. should facilitate NGO access to meetings and should make documents publicly available. Human rights issues, while not on the formal APEC agenda, are slowly forcing their way onto the backdrop of the meetings. This is primarily because of demands by citizens in the region for democratization and respect for human rights, including demands by groups in the 1998 host country, Malaysia. Human rights have also been highlighted when previous host governments have harassed NGOs or citizens engaged in protest or parallel activities. The Philippine government banned Nobel Peace Laureate Jos? Ramos Horta and other potential "troublemakers" from attending the Manila People's Forum in 1996, and Canada is in the midst of an investigation of police repression of protestors that may implicate the Canadian prime minister. The Malaysian government has made it clear it will tolerate no "unruliness." The informal bilateral discussions that parallel the multilateral meetings enable U.S. officials to raise issues not on the official APEC agenda. These are prime opportunities to raise issues regarding the social and environmental impact of the economic crisis and to emphasize respect for human rights. While it is laudable that Clinton will not meet with Prime Minister Mahathir to protest the detention of former deputy Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim, the inconsistency and hypocrisy that characterize U.S. policy in the region reinforce regional sentiment that America's promotion of democracy, worker rights, and environmental protection are self-serving in nature. To overcome these criticisms and to chart a more responsible foreign policy toward APEC and its member countries, Washington should indicate that the U.S., too, needs to improve its own practice regarding the environment and human rights. Specifically, we recommend that Washington take the following actions: o Stop insisting on comprehensive trade and investment liberalization and recognize the validity of Asian development models that allow for the judicious intervention of government as a legitimate strategy in pursuing industrialization and food security. o Support regional mechanisms to scale-up successful strategies of community-based natural resource management, encourage the transfer of clean production technologies, and promote energy conservation. o Consistently implement existing labor rights provisions in U.S. trade legislation, such as GSP provisions regarding the Export-Import Bank, Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC) operations, and the IMF. o Create citizen advisory groups paralleling APEC working-groups to enable NGOs and citizens to participate in the formulation of U.S. policy within APEC. John Gershman (jgershman@igc.org) is a Research Associate at the Institute for Development Research. Sources for More Information APEC Education Network Box 353690 Seattle, WA 98195 Voice: (206) 543-0663 Fax: (206) 616-1978 Email: Hellman@u.washington.edu Website: http://www.apec.org/ Contact: Donald Hellman APEC Secretariat 438 Alexandra Rd. Alexandra Point Singapore Voice: (65) 276-1880 Fax (65) 276-1775 Website: http://www.apecsec.org.sg/ Asia Pacific Center for Justice and Peace 110 Maryland Ave. NE, Box 70 Washington, DC 20002 Voice: (202) 543-1094 Fax: (202) 546-1094 Email: apcjp@igc.apc.org Website: http://www.apcjp.org Contact: Andrew Wells Asian Human Rights Commission Unit D, 7 Floor, 16 Argyle St. Mongkok Commercial Centre Kowloon, Hong Kong SAR China Voice: (8522) 698-6339 Fax:(8522) 698-6367 Email: ua@hk.super.net Website: http://www.hk.super.net/~ahrchk Focus on the Global South c/o CUSRI, Prachuabmoh Bldg. Chulalongkorn University Phyathai Road Bangkok 10330 Thailand Voice: (662) 218-7363 Fax: (662) 255-9976 Email: admin@focusweb.org Website: http://www.focusweb.org Contact: Walden Bello Nautilus Institute for Security and Sustainable Development 1831 Second St. Berkeley, CA 94710 Voice: (510) 204-9296 Fax: (510) 204-9298 Email: lzarsky@nautilus.org Website: http://www.nautilus.org Contact: Lyuba Zarsky Publications Vinod K. Aggarwal and Charles E. Morrison (eds), Asia-Pacific Crossroads: Regime Creation and the Future of APEC (New York: St.Martin's, 1998). Walden Bello and Jenina Joy-Ch?vez-Malaluan, APEC: Four Adjectives in Search of a Noun (Philippines: Manila People's Forum on APEC, 1996). Focus on Trade, an electronic magazine produced by Focus on the Global South. Donald C. Hellman and Kenneth B. Pyle From APEC to Xanadu: Creating a Viable Community in the Post-Cold War Pacific (New York: M.E. Sharpe, 1998). Lyuba Zarsky, "APEC and the `Sustainable Development' Agenda," Asian Perspectives, 1998. World Wide Web APEC Education Foundation http://www.apecef.org APEC Secretariat http://www.apecsec.org.sg Good links on APEC http://www.nautilus.org Human Rights Watch http://www.hrwatch.org U.S. State Department Bureau of East Asian and Pacific Affairs http://www.state.gov/www/regions/eap/index.html ***************************************************************** Foreign Policy In Focus is a joint project of the Interhemipsheric Resource Center (IRC) and the Institute for Policy Studies (IPS). In Focus briefs document the problems of current U.S. foreign policy and offer recommendations for alternative policy directions that would make the United States a more responsible global partner. To order Foreign Policy In Focus, call (505) 842-8288 or visit our website for ordering information at: http://www.foreignpolicy-infocus.org. To subscribe to the New U.S. Foreign Policy discussion list, send a message to: newusfp-manager@zianet.com. Inside the body of the message write: Join newusfp [Your Email Address]. ***************************************************************** From panap at panap.po.my Fri Nov 13 10:15:47 1998 From: panap at panap.po.my (PAN Asia Pacific) Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1998 10:15:47 Subject: [asia-apec 875] Message to the WTO - Hands Off Agriculture! Message-ID: <3144@panap.po.my> Message to the WTO - Hands Off Agriculture! By Suria Prakash and Jennifer Mourin Food security is emerging as a major issue in the APEC region and in other Asian countries following liberalization of agricultural trade, said participants at the Forum on Land, Food Security and Agriculture held at the Grand Olympic Hotel. Agricultural trade liberalization has hit farmers and consumers in the region, causing increased landlessness, unemployment and food shortages. Food prices, in many countries, have gone beyond the reach of the common people, and many of them now go hungry or eat less, they said. "We must remove agricultural trade and food from the purview of the WTO and other trade agreements. As long as we do not do this, there is no food security. And this is the challenge to the poor", the Forum said. "Domestic hunger is always the outcome of free trade in agriculture", said Dr Vandana Shiva, Director of the Research Foundation for Science, Technology and Ecology. "And the people who go hungry are those who can grow their own food if they are allowed to do so. But today's totalitarian corporate-controlled food system doesn't allow this. So small farmers, fisherfolk and indigenous people are all affected. Yet, the only people who can work the land for food are the landless workers". "Food should be taken out of trade agreements; and food and seeds out of the Intellectual Property Rights system. Food rights should be at the centre of food production in a deeper ethnical system of sharing and caring. And each one of us carry responsibility for this. Through united action, we can turn the logic of the power-that-be and the corporations". "All trade agreements merely legitimise organised greed", she said. "As if you are not greedy, you are illegal; if you save or share seeds, you are illegal, storing food is illegal, small fishermen trying to earn their livelihood through fishing is illegal…" These are then justified under the term 'competitive advantages'. India, for example, has been told not to grow food, but grow and export shrimps (through aquaculture) and flowers, and also export meat for competitive advantage. But, every US dollar earned from meat export has destroyed $15 of local food economy, and every dollar earned from aquaculture export destroyed $5 - $10 worth of local economy. One dollar earned from flower export can import only ¼th of the food that can be grown with the same resources. Sarojeni Rengam, of Pesticide Action Network (PAN) Asia and the Pacific, said what Asian countries were experiencing was not just a food crisis but a 'human crisis', because it had not only economic, but political, social and cultural impacts. Countries such as Malaysia, Thailand, and Indonesia faced severe problems destabilising households and community as they pushed hard for industrialisation and exports of 'high-value' crops and neglected food production. Food is not merely a commodity - it is a source of livelihood, survival, and identity, and essence of culture for communities. In Malaysia, cereals accounted for 48.1% of last year's RM4.7 billion food import bill deficit. Food prices had jumped 40% - 60% this year and thousands of jobs lost and minimum wages frozen following the financial crisis, which was an offshoot of globalisation. "Women are the hardest hit," she said. Violence against women has risen as food availability decreased in the family". "We cannot gamble our means of existance on market speculation", she warned. "Food security requires that we back away from trade liberalisation in agriculture and food production, and construct national policies that promote sustainable agriculture that ensure a high level of public control over agricultural production and distribution, and that guarantee food to all Malaysians". The Forum's was unanimous in its rejection of APEC, its principals and activities. But, "where should we be going from here?" asked Mika Iba, of the Network for Safe and Secure Food based in Japan. The GATT revision is due in the year 2000, and "it is an opportunity for Southern agricultural countries to work for the scrapping of the agricultural agreement from the WTO," she said. Later, addressing a press conference Rafael Mariano, Chairperson of the Peasant Movement of the Philippines, representing also the National Patriotic Alliance, said that local markets in the Philippines has been dumping grounds for food imports following agricultural trade liberalisation. Peasants have loss their land, unemployment was increasing, and more and more consumers are left with no purchasing power to buy food. Landlessness was the key question in the Philippines, he emphasised. "Among every 10 land tillers, 7 do not own land and pay exorbitant land rent. For food security, the Philippines has to address the question of landlessness, and break land monopoly". Brewster Keene, who also addressed the press, said corporations were increasingly controlling food production and trade. And now, seeds through genetic engineering and patents. "This is leading to the control of the whole food chain, and the companies are deciding what we should eat, which is alarming". The large corporations are now pushing genetically engineered foods, "but if the public knew what was going on behind their promotion of genetically engineered foods, the companies will be in trouble". He said the 'losers' in trade liberalisation, namely peasants, fisherfolk, indigenous people - should form a 'common alliance' with other people in fighting against this unfair system. - end - From viktor at skyinet.net Fri Nov 13 14:34:07 1998 From: viktor at skyinet.net (victor sapar) Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1998 13:34:07 +0800 Subject: [asia-apec 876] APPA website Message-ID: <364BC4CF.BF18F276@skyinet.net> Dear friends; Take a peek at the Asia-Pacific Peoples' Assembly (APPA) at http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Senate/8340 or better still, send in your solidarity message. for the APPA Secretariat -- victor c. sapar alternate e-mail: victor.sapar@technologist.com web: http://www.alter-info.home.ml.org ICQ #: 5250806 From appasec at tm.net.my Fri Nov 13 17:56:58 1998 From: appasec at tm.net.my (APPA) Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1998 16:56:58 +0800 Subject: [asia-apec 877] News & Stories from Asia Pacific Peoples' Assembly (Pages 4 to 6) Message-ID: <19981113094913.DMJN5403@[202.188.21.5]> THE RAG Resistance Against Globalisation APPA Daily Bulletin No. 5, Friday, November 13, 1998 (Page 4 to Page 6) CAPITAL-CENTRED DEVELOPMENT FLAWED Community Enterprises for Sustainable Development Grand Pacific Hotel, Thurs: Thirty-five participants from 10 countries ? Canada, Cambodia, India, Indonesia, Japan, Nepal, the Philippines, Thailand, Vietnam and Malaysia ? listened to Bishan Singh, President of Malaysia's Sustainable Development Network (SUSDEN) open the issue forum with his paper An Option For Fair Trade, Environment Conservation and People-centred Development. He said that the current economic crisis faced by the Asian economies was due to a flaw in our development approach. "The flaw is that our development approach is capital-centred and not people-centred," he said. "A capital-centred approach is not working for the majority, only benefiting a small segment of society." According to the UNDP's Human Development Report, growth has failed more than a quarter of the world's people in over 100 countries, some of them rich countries. Bishan elaborated by raising the issue of ethics and economics. Ethics must be integrated into economics. "Without ethics in economics, the process will unleash negative human values like greed - it is the soul of economics. The capital-centred approach is based on the principle of exploitation, extraction, acquisition and control. It is not based on sharing, giving and sustaining, which are the norms and values of the people-centred approach. This approach will trigger and eventually bring about the transformation and a development that are socially just, ecologically sustainable, economically viable, politically participatory and culturally vibrant." Bishan lists three fundamental principles for sustainable development: 1) responsibility and management of stewardship in the use of natural resources as well as the protection of such resources from being depleted permanently; 2) distributive justice that is greater sharing in the resources with priority over survival and livelihood before luxury; 3) inter-generational equity which addresses the protection of resources and means of livelihood for the future generation. He stressed that these principles cannot be achieved under the dominant development approach. Hence, it is important to be people-centred - "people and ecology before profit". GLOBALISATION STEALS INDIGENOUS PEOPLES' LAND FEDERAL HOTEL, TUES: Participants to the Indigenous Peoples Forum agreed that the major problem of indigenous peoples is the non-recognition of indigenous peoples' rights. Central to this is the violation of land rights which led to the displacement of the peoples from their ancestral lands, either by legalised landgrabbing or by brute force. The Sarawak representatives said that the denudation of their forest habitation by excessive logging and the setting up of palm oil plantations are being perpetrated by businessmen in collaboration with government officials. The continued destruction of their lands have forced the Penan to blockade the roads leading to the logging areas. Prof Martin Kanene of Papua New Guinea added that because of lack of understanding of the implications of globalisation, the clan chiefs in his country have allowed the logging of their forests for token fees. The repressive political environment has stifled efforts to educate the people on a massive scale. The Philippine representative, a member of the Cordillera Peoples Alliance, said that globalisation was an expanded form of neo-colonisation where the country's resources are exploited by multinationals with support from the state and the ruling elite. Liberalisation further opened the country to exploitation, with the government passing laws to facilitate the entry of multinationals. She cited the 1995 Mining Act which allowed 100% profit repatriation by foreign companies and tax exemptions on imported equipment. She expressed the urgency of uniting and collectively rejecting imperialist globalisation. Highlighting the indigenous peoples' spiritual connection to the land, the Dene Indian from Canada informed the group that her people succeeded in asserting their land rights through the use of oral history as proof of their inherent right to their territory. The group also recognised that they and their forest ecosystems were not only threatened by mega-development projects and commercial agricultural activities, but also by bio-pirates disguised as academic researchers and medical practitioners stealing body tissues for genetic studies and samples of their flora for commercial purposes. These problems prompted some participants to call for unity, information exchange and concerted action to stop the appropriation of indigenous peoples' bodies and knowledge for profit. NATIONALISE PUBLIC HEALTHCARE, PUBLIC AMENITIES IMMEDIATELY! Ritz Garden Hotel, Thurs: One hundred and six participants representing 16 Asia-Pacific nations called for the rejection of the privatisation of healthcare, public amenities and education. The issue forum demanded that these privatised services be nationalised immediately. Governments should embrace a development model that is people and community-centered as opposed to profit-motivated. "People should be at the heart of any development model," said Charles Santiago, forum organiser. The victims of privatisation are the poor, marginalised, working and middle classes. The beneficaries are local elites and multinational corporations. Thus, privatisation is a strategy to expand wealth accumulation of the bourgeoisie at the expense of the community at large, he said. Privatisation has led to an increase in cost, created oversupply conditions, and loss of jobs. In addition, these companies are presently waiting in the bailout queue as a result of the economic crisis. In many countries, money for bailouts come from workers pensions and savings. Privatisation thus privatises profit but socialises losses and debts. FLOWERS FOR TOWERS Migrant Worker Forum protest at KLCC Kuala Lumpur, Thurs: There have been many accolades for the KL Twin Towers, "the pride of our nation". Tonight though, a different sort of recognition was bestowed upon it. A wreath, with candles lit around, was placed near the lift of one of the towers, "to remember migrants and workers who had died or got very little compensation while constructing this 'Malaysian pyramid'," said Tenaganita Director Irene Fernandez, "and to remember their families who continue to suffer." Held in conjunction with the closing ceremony of the two-day Fourth International Migrant Workers Forum on APEC, the gesture was also "to remind us that sometimes, as a nation, we pride ourselves over all these tall buildings when in fact they're symbols of exploitation, particularly of migrant workers," she said. According to Fernandez, Asian migrants in Hong Kong and other migrant workers have done a similar expression at the new Hong Kong airport ?another kind of pyramid". She calls these "the new pyramids of Asia, built by the new Pharoahs of Asia". Watched by curious up-market shoppers and even a few migrants, the ceremony went by without a hitch; the only objection that came from the security people was that the candles should not be lit inside the hall where the declaration and conclusion of the forum were read out to some 60 participants. So the organisers had to improvise and fortunately, they found the more impactful location outside. A fittingly placed "tribute" indeed. HUMAN RIGHTS ABOVE PROFITS Federal hotel, Thurs: All APEC development policies should lead to the realisation of human rights as its primary goal, and not economic statistics, the Human Rights Forum statement revealed. The forum believes that models such as APEC place maximisation of profits as the essential goal rather than the realisation of economic and other human rights. Further, transnational corporations and multilateral institutions (eg. IMF and WTO), with undemocratic national governments, have weakened the capacity of the State to mobilise resources to implement basic rights. Some participants stressed that certain countries with unique human rights situations (eg. Burma, East Timor and Tibet) should also be mentioned in the statement, so too the obstacle posed by the current patriarchal structures in society to real development. Other needs identified were: 1) Awareness of rape and the threat of rape, violations of health and reproduction rights, gay and lesbian rights, rights for refugees and asylum seekers, rights for migrant workers, rights of indigenous peoples and greater respect for cultural diversity. 2) Linkages and dialogue with political parties and transnational companies. 3) Corporate accountability and civil society within multinationals. 4) Transnational corporations to be bound by international law. 5) Youth networking and education in schools, with the help of ministries. 6) Abolition of draconian laws and police brutality. In the plenary session, it was decided that initiatives since the previous alternative APEC conferences should be assessed and efforts made to establish a regional mechanism for human rights, like an NGO committee or a training centre. Also, the present human rights forum should highlight the current economic crisis and the significance of the 50th Anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Participants were also briefed on the situation in Tibet by Tseten Norbu from the Tibetan Youth Congress. A suggestion that the Tibetans be realistic and take up arms for their cause was vehemently opposed by others, with one opining that it was more realistic to view that suggestion as futile, since Tibet would not have the resources to challenge China through violent means. Furthermore, trying to gain independence through peaceful means is no more idealistic than working towards the full realisation of human rights. Using Kuwait as a comparison, Tseten said Tibet had two things that were more valuable than oil - "peace and principles". Whilst noting that several countries had achieved independence through violent means since Tibet's occupation, he argued that if there was no support from the world for Tibet's peaceful struggle, then history would prove that freedom can only be gained through violent means. Tibetan society, he added, reflects the universal principles espoused by governments and human rights workers (as found in human rights instruments), and if we do not support their struggle for independence, then the principles would be meaningless and all of us would be responsible for the sufferings of Tibetans. THE INAUGURAL APPA AWARDS This is for the benefit of those stuck in freezing conference halls, taken while I whizzed around the city on my motorbike. Of all the hundreds of forums organised by APPA which I had to cover (video tape), here are my choices ... The Most Lively Sessions (I mean, people moving-off from their chairs and doing some action) ... Youth & Student Forum The Most Crowded Forum ... Women (just too many participants) and Privatisation (just too small a hall) The Most Serious Forum (I mean, people look serious, maybe it's just the military look needed to discuss their issues) ... US-Japan Militarist Agenda The Most Lavish Food Spread (I liked their desserts especially) ... Labour Forum The "Most People-Centred Issue With The Least People-Centred Hall Setting and The Squarest of Them All" Forum .... Human Rights and Democracy The Most "Lepak" (feeling-at-home) Forum ... Urban Poor The "Most Beautiful Background For Photography and Video" Forum (the forum was in an "urban settler" area) ... Urban Poor The Most (and only) Un-hotel and Fully-fanned Forum ... Urban Poor The "Most Colourful Display of Products and Materials For Sale Outside The Hall" Forum ... Women (they were there first) and Food Security (they were there next, so...) The Most Dingy Lights For a Conference (I wonder if they saw any light at all on their issues?) ... Community Livelihood The Most Hungry Group of Environmentalists Forum (lunch was not provided at the venue) ... Environment & Forestry The Most Rushed Forum (a quickie ... I was lucky I was there in time to salvage some shots for my video) ... Indigenous People The "Most Beautiful Background" Forum (of course they just put-up all their mats together on the wall) ... Indigenous People The "Most Technical and Longest Terms Used In a Forum" Forum ... Privatisation and something ... The Most Advanced Technology User Group in a Forum (their translator was using some wireless set to communicate with four or five persons at a go - maybe it was borrowed from the military!) ... US-Japan Militarist Agenda The Group That I Can't Think of Anything To Say About (maybe that's good!) .. Migrant Workers I only had about 30-45 minutes per group. I wish I could have stayed, but then I was in search of the best forum. I am not so sure which one will come out on top, but one thing I am sure: the most stringent and strict security force I have ever experienced is the APPA Volunteers Security Team. Some probably still think I work for the Special Branch. UDHR CONCERT All APPA delegates are encouraged to join in the cultural evening organised by The Peoples Festival '98 Kultcha.Com in conjunction with the 50th Anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights on Nov 14, from 8pm at Federal Hotel. See you there! CULTURAL SOLIDARITY EVENING Tenaganita cordially invites all APPA delegates for a fun evening of dance, song, poetry and more on Nov 15, from 2pm-6pm at Loyola Hall, Church of St Francis Xavier, Jalan Gasing, Petaling Jaya. For more information, tel: (03) 291 3681. From appasec at tm.net.my Fri Nov 13 17:57:12 1998 From: appasec at tm.net.my (APPA) Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1998 16:57:12 +0800 Subject: [asia-apec 878] News & Stories from Asia Pacific Peoples' Assembly (Pages 1 to 3) Message-ID: <19981113094928.DMJP5403@[202.188.21.5]> THE RAG Resistance Against Globalisation APPA Daily Bulletin No. 5, Friday, November 13, 1998 (Page 1 to Page 3) REMEMBERING DILI MASSACRE Minimal police presence ensures peaceful East Timor vigil KUALA LUMPUR, Thurs: Some 200 Asia Pacific Peoples' Assembly (APPA) participants staged a one-hour candle-light vigil outside the Indonesian Embassy here to mark the 7th anniversary of the Dili massacre in East Timor which killed 271 people and wounded 302. The protest also marked the launch of the campaign to free Xanana Gusmao, the East Timor leader and freedom fighter who was captured and jailed in 1992. What made the occasion special was the participation of international delegates to remember young Malaysian student activist Kamal Barnadhaj who was among those shot dead in the incident on Nov 12, 1991. Filled with emotions and singing songs of freedom, the participants held banners condemning the Indonesian Government for the genocide in which another 250 people are still missing, and called for the immediate release of Xanana. Resolutions drawn up by the Asia Pacific Coalition on East Timor (APCET) was read out by its co-ordinators who made their demands in no uncertain terms ? free Xanana and East Timor. They called for the unconditional independence of East Timor and urged the Habibie Government to free the territory which Indonesia has illegally occupied by force since 1975. The one-hour vigil was staged peacefully with minimal police presence, proving to the world that demonstrations usually only turn violent under provocation by the authorities. The atmosphere was not tense and the demonstrators showed they were courteous when they cheered policemen for controlling the traffic. Reading out a declaration, Solidaritas Timor Timur Malaysia coordinator Nadia Barnadhaj said the Dili Massacre ruptured the cover-up of systematic torture, rape, disappearances and murder of the East Timorese people by the Indonesian military since Indonesia invaded the territory in 1975. "Today, we remember not only those who died on that day, but all those who perished at the hands of this regime. To date there have been more than 200,000 deaths of East Timorese, an estimated one-third of the 1975 population," she said. Nadia said the new leadership in the Indonesia regime had taken several steps in an attempt to portray a peace-seeking image with regards to East Timor. However, she said, these were weak attempts at appeasing international criticism of the regime that still remains unwilling to make genuine efforts for peace. She pointed out that the much publicised troop withdrawals from East Timor have been exposed as a fabrication. Instead of a net reduction of 1,000 troops in August, as claimed by Indonesian Foreign Minister Ali Alatas, the numbers remain the same at 17,834 troops. When paramilitary militias are included, the total comes to more than 21,500 troops ? nearly 9,000 more than the figure claimed by the Indonesian military at the time of the supposed withdrawals. She also said that the proposal to make East Timor an "autonomous region" has largely been an attempt to douse the East Timorese call for a referendum. This call has been rejected by the Habibie administration as it is aware that such a referendum will reveal the Timorese's unanimous desire for self-determination and independence. Finally, Nadia argued that the UN sponsored tripartite talks on East Timor, which Indonesia and Portugal have participated in, has failed to include a fundamental component of a genuine negotiation process ? representation from the Timorese people themselves. She said that negotiations for peace in East Timor cannot be genuinely resolved by the United Nations, Portugal and the Habibie administration alone. "These negotiations must involve the participation of the East Timorese, represented by their recognised leader Xanana Gusmao," she urged, calling the Habibie administration to take a genuine step towards a peaceful settlement in East Timor. "One of the first steps would be the release of Xanana Gusmao, from Cipinang Prison in Jakarta," she said. "As regional affiliates of the Asia Pacific Coalition for East Timor, we urge the Habibie administration, on the 7th anniversary of the Dili Massacre, to begin resolving the horrors of the past by taking genuine steps for a peaceful future." INDONESIAN MILITARY SHOOTS STUDENT PROTESTERS Jakarta, Thurs: Indonesian troops fired rubber bullets, water cannons and tear gas tonight to stop thousands of students from reaching the parliament. Hospitals in the area reported 83 people injured (at 11pm, Malaysian time), many seriously. The students were protesting against the MPR, whom they refer to as an "illegitimate" hangover from the regime of former president Suharto, and demanded early elections. Thousands also took to the streets of Bandung, Solo, Yogyakarta and Purwokerto. The special session of the People's Consultative Assembly (MPR) has been meeting since Tuesday on upcoming elections in 1999 and to prepare for new political laws for the post-Suharto era. It also included debates on limiting the presidency to two terms and investigating the fortune accumulated by Suharto and his family. Some legislative members have already spoken out. "Everyone agrees the general election should be held in May, or June at the latest," said Marwah Daud Ibrahim, deputy chairman of the Golkar faction, according to a Reuters news report. Earlier, she quoted the Interior Minister as saying it would be more appropriate for elections to the held in July. URBAN DECAY Delegates manage to visit squatters after police leave Sentul, Thurs: Despite yesterday's police harassment, APPA participants managed to proceed with the Urban Poor Forum in Chubadak Village, an urban squatter community in Sentul, Kuala Lumpur. Contrary to yesterday's report, the 50 delegates were able to visit the actual squatter area after the police left around 5.30pm, but in groups of 10 to avoid attention. At the squatter community, participants were appalled at conditions which were felt to be much worse than certain squatter villages in Bangkok which practised land sharing. Earlier in the day, despite the presence of police outside, delegates heard several speakers talk about the forced evictions of urban squatters throughout the Asian countries. KS Jomo, a professor of economics at the Universiti Malaya, pointed out that the Malaysian government encouraged urban migration in the 70s, inviting urban settlers to open up new settlements on the edges of the city with the aim of developing these areas. But as development of the surrounding land increased, so did the value of the land. The government then proceeded to sell this land to developers who either abused police power or employed thugs to clear the land of settlers. According to Theodora Anna of Urban Poor Associates in the Philippines, the Asian Coalition for Housing Rights "Eviction Watch" programme estimated between 200,000-300,000 urban poor families suffered evictions in Asia. "The documented cases of over 250,000 evicted families in 1996-97 has borne this out," he said. "It is estimated that for every reported case, two go unreported. These evictions are not covered by the media, nor do NGOs get to know about them." The source of the problem as raised by the forum's speakers was a shortage of low-cost, affordable housing. Forced evictions, Theodora pointed out, destroyed social survival networks (financial losses, loss of friends, neighbours and a supportive community), destroyed life savings and assets, increased the cost of living, destabilised the household economy and worsened conditions of poverty. Today, participants visited another squatter community at Sungai Rumput Village, Damansara Utama, in Kuala Lumpur, where the demolition of squatter houses by a developer on Oct 26 left 68 families homeless. They now live in tents under conditions of squalor, without water or electricity. The Urban Poor Forum hopes to address this situation directly and will be drafting its resolutions for the plenary on Friday. HANDS OFF AGRICULTURE, WTO! By Suria Prakash and Jennifer Mourin Grand olympic hotel, Thurs: Food security is emerging as a major issue in the APEC region and in other Asian countries following liberalisation of agricultural trade, said participants at the Forum on Land, Food Security and Agriculture. Agricultural trade liberalisation has hit farmers and consumers in the region, causing increased landlessness, unemployment and food shortages. Food prices, in many countries, have gone beyond the reach of the common people, and many of them now go hungry or eat less, they said. "We must remove agricultural trade and food from the purview of the WTO and other trade agreements. As long as we do not do this, there is no food security. And this is the challenge to the poor", the forum said. "Domestic hunger is always the outcome of free trade in agriculture," said Dr Vandana Shiva, Director of the Research Foundation for Science, Technology and Ecology. "And the people who go hungry are those who can grow their own food if they are allowed to do so. But today's totalitarian corporate-controlled food system doesn't allow this. So small farmers, fisherfolk and indigenous people are all affected. Yet, the only people who can work the land for food are the landless workers." "Food should be taken out of trade agreements; and food and seeds out of the intellectual property rights system. Food rights should be at the centre of food production in a deeper ethnical system of sharing and caring. And each one of us carry responsibility for this. Through united action, we can turn the logic of the powers-that-be and the corporations. All trade agreements merely legitimise organised greed," she said. "And if you are not greedy, you are illegal; if you save or share seeds, you are illegal, storing food is illegal, small fishermen trying to earn their livelihood through fishing is illegal..." These are then justified under the term "competitive advantages". India, for example, has been told not to grow food, but to grow and export shrimp (through aquaculture) and flowers, and also meat for a competitive advantage. But, every US dollar earned from meat export has destroyed US$15 of local food economy, and every dollar earned from aquaculture export destroys US$5-US$10 worth of local economy. One dollar earned from flower export can import only a quarter of the food that can be grown with the same resources. Sarojeni Rengam of Pesticide Action Network (PAN) Asia and the Pacific said what Asian countries were experiencing was not just a food crisis but a "human crisis", because it had not only economic, but political, social and cultural impacts. Countries such as Malaysia, Thailand, and Indonesia faced severe problems destabilising households and community as they pushed hard for industrialisation and exports of "high-value" crops and neglected food production. Food is not merely a commodity - it is a source of livelihood, survival, and identity, and essence of culture for communities. In Malaysia, cereals accounted for 48.1% of last year's RM4.7 billion food import bill deficit. Food prices have jumped 40% - 60% this year and thousands of jobs lost and minimum wages frozen following the financial crisis, which was an offshoot of globalisation. "Women are the hardest hit," she said. "Violence against women has risen as food availability decreased in the family. We cannot gamble our means of existence on market speculation," she warned. "Food security requires that we back away from trade liberalisation in agriculture and food production, and construct national policies that promote sustainable agriculture that ensure a high level of public control over agricultural production and distribution, and that guarantees food to all Malaysians." The forum was unanimous in its rejection of APEC, its principals and activities. But, "where should we be going from here?" asked Mika Iba of the Network for Safe and Secure Food based in Japan. The GATT revision is due in the year 2000, and "it is an opportunity for Southern agricultural countries to work for the scrapping of the agricultural agreement from the WTO," she said. Later, addressing a press conference, Rafael Mariano, Chairperson of the Peasant Movement of the Philippines, representing also the National Patriotic Alliance, said that local markets in the Philippines have been dumping grounds for food imports following agricultural trade liberalisation. Peasants have lost their land, unemployment was increasing, and more and more consumers are left with no purchasing power to buy food. Landlessness is the key question in the Philippines, he emphasised. "Among every 10 land tillers, seven do not own land and pay exorbitant land rents. For food security, the Philippines has to address the question of landlessness, and break land monopoly." Brewster Keene, who also addressed the press, said corporations were increasingly controlling food production and trade, and now, seeds through genetic engineering and patents. "This is leading to the control of the whole food chain, and the companies are deciding what we should eat, which is alarming." The large corporations are now pushing genetically engineered foods, "but if the public knew what was going on behind their promotion of genetically engineered foods, the companies will be in trouble". He said the "losers" in trade liberalisation, namely peasants, fisherfolk and indigenous people, should form a "common alliance" with other people in fighting against this unfair system. From amittal at foodfirst.org Sat Nov 14 11:44:15 1998 From: amittal at foodfirst.org (Anuradha Mittal) Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1998 18:44:15 -0800 Subject: [asia-apec 879] OPPOSE THE STRATEGIC ALLIANCE BETWEEN NOVARTIS, THE WORLD"S LARGEST BIOTECHNOLOGY AND AGRICULTURAL COMPANY AND UC BERKELEY Message-ID: PLEASE DISTRIBUTE!! OPPOSE THE STRATEGIC ALLIANCE BETWEEN NOVARTIS, THE WORLD"S LARGEST BIOTECHNOLOGY AND AGRICULTURAL COMPANY AND UC BERKELEY Below is an opinion editorial by Peter Rosset of Food First and Monica Moore of Pesticide Action Network. A shorter version of this appeared in the San Francisco Chronicle on Friday October 23, 1998. The editorial opposes the recently announced proposed $50 million "strategic alliance" between Novartis, the world's largest biotechnology and agrichemical company, and the University of California at Berkeley's College of Natural Resources. Among many other things, Novartis is a major producer of organophospate and other insecticides, including genetically engineered insecticidal corn and other crops. If you are concerned about the selling off of the UC system to biotechnology and agribusiness companies and the implications of this trend for sustainable agriculture, PLEASE WRITE NOW to UC Berkeley Chancellor Robert Berdahl, the editors of the San Francisco Chronicle and your state representatives stating your concerns and demanding that the deal be stopped until open public hearings resolve the many troubling issues raised by this kind of commercialization of public education. The relevant addresses are listed at the end of this alert. ___________________________________________ BACKGROUND - SF CHRONICLE OPINION EDITORIAL Research Alliance Debated By Peter Rosset and Monica Moore The proposed $50 million "strategic alliance" between biotech giant Novartis and U.C. Berkeley's College of Natural Resources raises questions that demand public scrutiny. The University is a public institution mandated to serve the people of California. Its core funding is appropriated by the state legislature, and its governing body, the Regents, is appointed by the Governor, California's highest elected official. Yet for a one-time investment, the College of Natural Resources would be 'joined at the hip' to one of the world's largest biotechnology and agrochemical companies, allowing public goods to be appropriated for private profit. Under this partnership Novartis employees would sit on internal College committees, and Novartis would receive first negotiating rights to patentable research discoveries. Public ownership, funding and oversight of University affairs require transparent management. Yet this deal was negotiated in secrecy. Critical information has been withheld from faculty, students and the public regarding the terms. Anticipating "significant press interest in the proposed strategic alliance," the Dean's office sent a memo to the College's faculty warning against "fielding calls yourself" and instructing them to refer inquiries to a designated public relations contact. Faculty opposition has been squelched by this gag order. Effective regulation of biotechnology in the coming century will require disinterested science. This agreement would disqualify a leading intellectual center from the ranks of institutions able to provide research free from vested interest. Nor can we ignore the implications for academic freedom in a College beholden to corporate interests. Will professors be encouraged to conduct research on impacts of Novartis technologies? According to its publicity, the College of Natural Resources is committed to sustainability, the environment and food safety. Public research institutions should provide exactly that kind of "public good" research, which the private sector cannot be expected to fund. For agriculture, the public reasonably expects this to mean investigation into areas such as sustainable agriculture and biological pest control. Yet these are precisely the areas where funding has been slashed in recent years as University resources have followed the money toward proprietary biotechnologies which pose risks to the environment and food safety. The proposed alliance would further tip the scale in favor of private Profits over public good research. This is a business deal, not a normal corporate gift, endowment or research grant -- a fact underscored in a September memo from Dean Gordon Rausser, describing his approach as "selecting a single industrial partner for a strategic alliance," and using "economic models to encourage competitive bidding among the partnership candidates." Other biotech giants made offers that were turned down, and the College was auctioned off to Novartis. Sadly, the same College rushing headlong into this questionable private sector partnership has turned down proposed partnerships with community organizations. The Bay Area Coalition for Urban Agriculture (BACUA), a consortium of 40 local community groups and non-profits, has been rebuffed in its attempt to create a partnership to provide research, education, training and extension to California's burgeoning numbers of urban farmers. As a land grant institution, U.C. Berkeley was established to provide California farmers with research and extension. As an educational innovator in a major metropolitan area, U.C. Berkeley is uniquely positioned to provide and share leadership in urban agriculture with these farmers and the community organizations that support them. Isn't this a better -- not to mention more strategic -- way to invest taxpayer dollars in education and research in the public interest? We urge the Academic Senate, Student Government, the Regents and the California Legislature to immediately initiate public hearings concerning the implications of this proposed partnership. In the meantime, the Chancellor of the University must block the deal unless such informed public scrutiny finds it worthy of going forward. We urge concerned readers to write to this newspaper, the Chancellor and your legislators to ensure the UCB/Novartis deal is put on hold until open public hearings have resolved these and other serious issues related to the proposed deal. ---------------------- Dr. Peter Rosset is Director of Food First/The Institute for Food & Development Policy in Oakland, and Monica Moore is Program Director of the Pesticide Action Network in San Francisco. ___________________________________________ TAKE ACTION Please write the UC Berkeley Chancellor, the SF Chronicle, and/or your state legislators opposing the UCB/Novartis "Strategic Alliance" and other corporate alliances. Points that you can use in your letter include: - UC Berkeley belongs to the people of California and it is not the place of UC Berkeley's College of Natural Resources or anyone else to sell it and its research capacity off to the highest commercial bidder. - The public funds the UC system to provide "public goods" research, like sustainable agriculture and ecological pest control. This deal will divert the UC research agenda toward product that have negative environmental, economic, health and human rights impacts. Can we expect Novartis-one of the world's largest biotech / agrochemical corporations-to support research that does not promote its bottom line, that does not promote biotech and agrochemicals? - This is not a "strategic alliance," but a corporate takeover of public education. Novartis would gain exclusive rights to negotiate patents, and the power to influence what research done at UC Berkeley. This deal allows a major public university to be appropriated for private profit. Write to: - Chancellor Robert Berdahl Office of the Chancellor 200 California Hall University of California Berkeley, CA 94720-1500 - Letters to the Editors San Francisco Chronicle 901 Mission Street San Francisco, CA 94103 By fax: (415) 543-7708 By email: chronletters@sfgate.com Letters of less than 250 words are more likely to be printed. You must include your name, address and telephone number. Your elected state representatives. If you need the name and contact information for your representatives: Call the Senate Secretary at (916)445-4251 or Assembly Chief Clerk at (916)445-3614, or go to www.assembly.ca.gov, or www.sen.ca.gov. Anuradha Mittal Policy Director Institute for Food and Development Policy - Food First 398 60th Street, Oakland, CA 94618 Phone: (510) 654-4400 Fax: (510) 654-4551 http://www.foodfirst.org From amittal at foodfirst.org Sat Nov 14 11:52:53 1998 From: amittal at foodfirst.org (Anuradha Mittal) Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1998 18:52:53 -0800 Subject: [asia-apec 880] URGENT sign on letter on the UCBerkeley/Novartis deal- PLEASE DISTRIBUTE Message-ID: URGENT/PLEASE SIGN-ON BY MONDAY NOV 16 5 PM Peter Rosset, exec. dir. of Food First, and Monica Moore, prog. dir. of the Pesticide Action Network-North America (PAN), have written this URGENT letter on the UCB/Novartis deal. The deal IS TO BE SIGNED ON NOV 19, SO WE MUST ACT NOW. This letter urges the chancellor to freeze the deal, and to have a meeting with us/you. Please sign on by Monday at 5 PM, and e-mail to Peter at rosset@socrates.berkeley.edu Peter will send it to the Chancellor with all the group's/people's names attached Thanks! ____ we will sign -- use the following organization title ________________________ ____ I will sign -- use my name: _______________________ and title at my my organization: ___________________ ********************************************* Chancellor Robert Berdahl 200 California Hall University of California at Berkeley CA 94720-1500 Dear Chancellor Berdahl: We the undersigned represent public interest organizations here in the San Francisco Bay Area, and we write to urge you to delay signing the agreement between Novartis and the College of Natural Resources until adequate public debate and scrutiny has taken place, including consultations with representatives of sustainable agriculture, environmental and community-based organizations. The proposed "strategic alliance" raises serious questions about the nature of public institutions, the directions of research on natural resources and agriculture, and regulatory science for the coming century. These questions demand public scrutiny for many reasons, of which the most important is the fact that the University of California at Berkeley is a public institution mandated to serve the people of California, whose core funding is appropriated by the state Legislature, and whose governing body is appointed by the Governor. We are deeple concerned that based on the decisions of a very small group of individuals within the University, for a one-time investment, the College of Natural Resources may be "joined at the hip" to one of the world's largest biotechnology and agrochemical companies, allowing public goods to be appropriated for private profit. Public ownership, funding and oversight of university affairs require transparent management, yet this deal was negotiated in secrecy and public debate of it actively discouraged. The office of the Dean of Natural Resources sent a memo to all college faculty urging them not to speak to the press and instead direct all inquiries to a public relations person, which has has had the effect of stifling the public expression of disagreement by faculty members. The details and background about the deal that were shared with faculty and students were presented as accomplished fact, without opportunity for influencing decision outcomes. We understand that under this partnership Novartis employees would sit on internal college committees, raising serious questions about impartiality and scientific rigor. We further understand that Novartis would receive first negotiating rights to a substantial proportion of patentable research discoveries, allowing the company to in effect "skim off the cream" of the public's investment for private profit. Effective regulation of biotechnology in the coming century will require disinterested science. The central theme of regulatory science in the 20th century was the impact of chemicals discharged into the environment. In the 21st century it will certainly be the impact of biologically altered organisms. This agreement would disqualify a leading intellectual center from the ranks of institutions able to provide the kind of research -- free from vested interest -- that could form the basis for sound regulatory policy. We also cannot ignore the implications for academic freedom in a college beholden to corporate interests. Will professors be encouraged to researchpotentially negative environmental and food safety impacts of Novartis' technologies? According to its web page, the College of Natural Resources is committed to sustainability, the environment and food safety. We have serious concerns about the impact of genetically engineered organisms in all three of these areas. Should genetic engineering be allowed to dominate the the focus of a college of publically funded 'natural resources'? Public research institutions should provide the kind of "public good" research which the private sector cannot be expected to fund. For agriculture, the public reasonably expects this to mean investigation into areas such as sustainable agriculture and biological pest control. Yet these are precisely the areas where funding has been slashed in the College, as university resources have followed the money toward proprietary biotechnologies. We urge you to look into the history of the now-defunct Division of Biological Control for an example of how research priorities have shifted in ways we believe are against the public's interest in agriculture and the environment. The proposed UCB/Novarts alliance would further tip the scale in favor of private profits over public good research. This is clearly a business deal, not a normal corporate gift, endowment or research grant. As we understand it, this was an auction in which other biotech companies made bids that were turned down, and the college was essentially sold off to Novartis, who will a semi-exclusive relationship. Sadly, the same college rushing headlong into this questionable private-sector partnership has rejected partnerships with community organizations working to help urban farmers. As an example of this, we urge you to investigate the case of the Bay Area Coalition for Urban Agriculture (BACUA), a coalition of Bay Area community groups which has repeatedly proposed just such a partnership to Dean Gordon Rausser and repeatedly received a cold shoulder. We urge you to freeze this deal until the questions we have raised here can be addressed in public, with adequate attention devoted to all of the concerns. This marks a major change in the way a major public university will operate in the future -- a shift about which the public must have some say. We request that you meet with our representatives to discuss this deal before it is signed. As this is an urgent matter, we appreciate your serious attentions to this request, and look forward to your expedited replay. Sincerely, PAN, Food First, .... ? Anuradha Mittal Policy Director Institute for Food and Development Policy - Food First 398 60th Street, Oakland, CA 94618 Phone: (510) 654-4400 Fax: (510) 654-4551 http://www.foodfirst.org From panap at panap.po.my Sat Nov 14 11:47:30 1998 From: panap at panap.po.my (PAN Asia Pacific) Date: Sat, 14 Nov 1998 11:47:30 Subject: [asia-apec 881] Hey TNCs! You Can't Feed the World on Greed Message-ID: <3148@panap.po.my> Hey TNCs! You Can't Feed the World on Greed By Suria Prakash and Jennifer Mourin Kuala Lumpur, Thursday 12th Nov. Transnational companies are increasing their control over agriculture production and trade all over the world, and this is creating new dependencies in the Third World, said participants in a workshop on TNCs at the Forum on Land, Food Security and Agriculture at the Grand Olympic Hotel. The workshop said it was necessary to monitor the actions and strategies of TNCs, inform the people about them, and counter these actions and strategies with alternative community based strategies. TNCs have pushed, and will benefit most from, globalisation. They are now in a frenzied process of 'consolidating and restructuring' themselves to be able to gain monopoly control over agricultural production, pesticide marketing, seeds, etc. For example, the top 10 pesticide companies now control 80% of the world's pesticide sales, and the top 10 seed companies control 23% of the world's seeds market, and the trend in seeds is towards greater concentration. Agrochemical, seed and food processing companies are merging and integrating, and soon five or six companies will be dominating the world'' food supplies. They will be telling us what to grow and where, and deciding what food we should eat. This is an alarming trend, the participants said. Monsanto, Cargill and Novartis came in for special mention. To make themselves more acceptable, the TNCs are now projecting a 'green' and 'environment friendly' image. The constant message, by both pesticides and genetically engineered food companies, that they were trying to 'feed the world' and 'protecting the environment', are part of this promotional exercise. But "more bio-diversity has been lost to industrial and chemical agriculture than to any other cause", said Barbara Dinham, of Pesticide Trust, London. "And more and more old pesticides are being pushed to developing countries". TNCs are also using government structures, and international and national development agencies to promote their products. Monsanto's recent effort in Bangladesh to provide 'micro credit' to farmers in collaboration with the Bangladesh Grameen Bank (rural bank) is a case in point. "The micro credit system is a part of globalisation and Monsanto's effort to expand its markets", said Farhad Mazhar, of UBINIG, Bangladesh. "In this process, the farmers lost both ways. They had to pay high interest to the bank for the loan, and also had to buy Monsanto's propriety technology with the money", he said. On the other hand, Monsanto projected deal worldwide as an example of how an 'advanced genetic engineering technology' could help farmers in a poor country. However, because of world-wide protest, the Grameen Bank later withdrew from the project. But several other such dubious 'rural development' programmers" go through in the developing countries with active support from politicians and bureaucrats, who are co-opted into TNC game plans. NGOs are also often co-opted into these programmes. Dr Romeo Quijano, of the Philippines, narrated how he was bullied by TNC (Hoechst) for talking publicly about the harmful effects of the pesticide endosulphan. Such 'bullying tactics' by TNCs against critics, farmers and even against governments are quite common, pointed out other participants. Dr Quijano characterised TNCs as "insensitive, amoral, unethical, unable to appreciate the truth, and inherently unscientific and greedy. With the strength of their capital, they use brute power to satisfy their greed". TNCs were also heavily influencing the Codex, the forum that sets world food safety standards, in their favour. "It is therefore important for the South to lobby hard at the Codex", urged Dr Michael Hansen, of the Consumer Policy Research Unit, USA. "If there is enough lobbying from the South, it help quite a lot", he said. The workshop recommended the support and development of campaigns against TNCs and also to create alternatives to TNC strategies at the community level to counter their growing power. These actions included: - Research company strategies, actions and products. - Create awareness at the local level - Monitor practices and impact of the company - Expose corporate abuses and practices at all levels, e.g. through action alerts, and demands for accountability and ethical practices - Ensure compliance with codes and international instruments - Initiate boycotts, legal suits, shareholder demands, etc. - Strengthen international networking and monitoring for advocacy against TNCs - Participate in UN or inter-governmental conferences to bring abuses to the notice of the international community. Alternatives at the community level included : - Organising at local level - Undertaking specific actions like monitoring health effects of pesticides, or monitoring pesticide free villages; global seed network; community level conservation, breeding and seed exchange - Study and publicise successful sustainable farming initiatives with details of yields and economic returns - Promoting breastfeeding as the basic food security at the household level. - end - From panap at panap.po.my Sat Nov 14 11:49:05 1998 From: panap at panap.po.my (PAN Asia Pacific) Date: Sat, 14 Nov 1998 11:49:05 Subject: [asia-apec 882] Hijacking Food! Message-ID: <3149@panap.po.my> Hijacking Food! By Suria Prakash and Jennifer Mourin Genetic Engineering - corporate tool for food security erosion and enslavement of farmers. Pesticide Action Network (PAN) Asia and the Pacific's Safe Food Campaign 1998 was launched at the Asia Pacific People's Assembly in Kuala Lumpur by a panel of scientists, health, environmental and consumer activists. The theme of the Campaign, "Say NO! to Genetic Engineering in agriculture and food production", aimed to debunk corporate propaganda that genetic engineering was the panacea for all our food needs into the next century. There is ever increasing evidence that this technology has more problems than solutions for us all. Launching the campaign, Sarojeni Rengam said "genetically engineered foods involved too many problems and unresolved issues, and these issues were of concern to the whole of Asia. This was because more and more genetically engineered foods were being imported into Asian countries, ostensibly to meet the food needs of the region. "We can feed ourselves without genetically engineered foods", she said. "It is an unnecessary technology. Our farmers do not want it, our consumers do not need it". Only agrochemical and seed corporations will benefit from it. PAN Asia and the Pacific is collaborating with its network partners in the region to carry out this campaign. "Growing concern over these 'miracle' foods and the lack of information has prompted coordinated action over this issue", said Jennifer Mourin, the Campaign coordinator. "Corporate dominance of our food production is being propelled by trade liberalization via trade blocks like APEC, and free trade agreements like the GATT. This calls for concerted action against genetically engineered foods in the region," she said. The panel of experts, which included Dr. Vandana Shiva, Dr. Micheal Hansen, Dr. Romeo Quijano, Barbara Dinham and Mika Iba, talked about how genetically engineered food was being forced upon countries by corporations and the various issues involved. Dr. Vandana Shiva said Monsanto, which was the biggest player in the game, was the "worst global terrorist". It was forcing the "hazardous food" on all countries, using tremendous pressure and misleading promotional campaigns. Monsanto has, in fact, "held the U.S. Food and Drug Administration captive", she stated. "It is a terrorist in not allowing people to have the food they want, by refusing to segregate genetically engineered food crops and to label genetically engineered foods. And through force, coercion and terror, Monsanto is trying to control the world's food production but we must try to make the food system more democratic by relating closely with farmers". She also said that, significantly, insurance companies were refusing to cover liability on genetically engineered foods, which reflected on its safety. The trade agreements do not talk about liabilities. "We must force the exporting countries to accept liabilities. If there is no liability, there is no trade or biosafety protocol, either". Dr. Michael Hansen, of the New York based Consumer Policy Institute warned that genetically engineered foods can cause severe, potentially fatal, allergies. Genetically modified peanuts, dairy products and shellfish were particularly dangerous, and there have been tested cases of allergy from soyabeans. "Without labelling, it is even impossible to trace what food you are reacting to. Europe and India are demanding labelling, and other countries should put pressure". "One of the greatest dangers of genetically engineered foods is the development of antibiotic resistance in consumers because of the antibiotic maker genes used in the process of modifying genes", he said. This is particularly worrisome in the context of the already increasing antibiotic resistance in the case of several infections diseases. Genetically engineered crops could also cause ecological disruptions as the modified genes can cross-over to other, non-engineered crops, creating 'superweeds'. As resistance to genetically engineered foods mounts in the US and Europe, "there is a danger that it will be dumped on the South", he warned. There were already 'significant imports' of soyabean in countries such as Singapore and South Korea. In Europe, anger caused among the people by the 'mad cow' disease has been stoked further by genetically engineered foods, said Barbara Dinham, of the Pesticides Trust based in London. "There is resistance in Europe because consumers feel genetically engineered foods are unsafe and their effects irreversible". One food chain in England has refused to buy genetically engineered foods. And there are movements opposing the import of genetically engineered foods and the planting of genetically engineered crops, which may force the European Commission to rethink its stand on these issues. Health and environmental activist, Dr. Romeo Quijano pointed out that small and poor farmers in the Asian region will be affected by the monopoly corporate control of genetically engineered seeds through patents. "This will worsen their dependence", he said. "Governments in the region are collaborators in pushing genetically engineered crops. National committees to regulate genetically engineered crops and foods are actually facilitating their entry instead of regulating. And there are no safety or toxicological tests". In Asia, most countries look up to Japan in matters of food issues, but Mika Ika said Japan did not have statutory regulation of genetically engineering foods, and there was also a lack of information. "There are only voluntary safety guidelines, and much of the information comes from Monsanto itself". In fact, the US Department of Agriculture, which has a high stake in promoting genetically engineered foods, had been leading 'intensive education' programmes on the safety of genetically engineered foods in Japan. Japanese consumers are now demanding labelling of genetically engineered foods, she said. As part of the Campaign, PAN AP had also organized a lecture tour of Dr Hansen to several countries in Asia, including Thailand. One major outcome of his trip there came on November 6 when the Thai Biotec Centre admitted that "genetically engineered foods and agricultural products may pose a health hazard." Dr. Suthat Sriwathanapong (National Centre for Genetic Engineering and Technology, said to protect consumers against this possible health risk, the Thai Food and Drug Administration should issue a more comprehensive rule to regulate genetically engineered drugs and products. The issues of genetic engineering as a tool of corporate control over our resources, increasing farmers dependency on foreign technological inputs, and threats to human health and environment will be discussed at the Forum on Land, Food Security and Agriculture. - end - From jkb at indo.net.id Sat Nov 14 23:41:58 1998 From: jkb at indo.net.id (Jaringan Kerja Budaya) Date: Sat, 14 Nov 1998 21:41:58 +0700 Subject: [asia-apec 884] 13 November incident in Jakarta Message-ID: <1.5.4.16.19981114214359.24978f94@pop.indo.net.id> Please forward to Indonesian delegates: The Volunteer Team for Humanity has compiled a list of the victims of the police and military's assaults on the protesters of the MPR special session. The list is based on information they had gathered as of midnight Friday night. The Team is still investigating many cases -- the shooting near the Atmajaya campus only stopped late Friday night -- so the following information should not be considered a complete accounting of the victims. Rather than reproduce the Team's tabulation in full, I'll simply summarize the main facts that emerge from it. Deaths The Team has reliable information, primarily from hospitals, on the deaths of nine individuals. Six were students killed on Jalan Sudirman (a main road near the parliament building). Three were killed on Thursday November 12: Uga Asmana of Muhamadiyah University, Hadi of Institute of Technology in Bandung, and Lukman Firdaus, of SMUN in Tangerang. Three were killed on Friday November 13: Tedy Masdani of ITI, Sigit Prasetyo of YAI, and Wawan of the Atmajaya University. Wawan was a member of the Volunteer Team tending to a wounded student on the road when shot by the security forces. Three members of the civilian guards recruited by the government to surround the parliarment were beaten to death by a crowd on Dewi Sartika road in Cawang. Wounded The Team has information on 99 wounded individuals. The single most severe incident took place in Slipi on November 12: four were wounded by gunfire, 46 suffered other types of injuries. From jkb at indo.net.id Sat Nov 14 23:42:08 1998 From: jkb at indo.net.id (Jaringan Kerja Budaya) Date: Sat, 14 Nov 1998 21:42:08 +0700 Subject: [asia-apec 885] A Member of Volunteer Team Died Message-ID: <1.5.4.16.19981114214412.24978010@pop.indo.net.id> Volunteer Team for Humanity Jl. Arus Dalam No. 1 Cawang, Jakarta Timur Phone: 62-21 8094531 E-mail: galih@indo.net.id ----------------------------- November 13, 1998 17:15 WIB One member of the Volunteer Team for Humanity from the St. Carolus Medical Post, Wawan, a student of Atmajaya Catholic University died of shooting this afternoon. He was last seen in the middle of the crowd in front of the Atmajaya Catholic University, Jl. Sudirman, Jakarta. He was helping the students who were attacked by the military when the security forces sprayed tear gas and hot water toward the demonstrating students. Amidst the chaos the security forces shot randomly with tin bullets at the students. Another member of the Volunteer Team from the St. Theresia Medical Post, Arie, confirmed that Wawan got shot and was immediately brought to the Jakarta Hospital. He died at the hospital. Besides Wawan, another student from Indonesian Institute of Technology also died of gunshot. No further information about his name and his whereabouts was able to be gathered yet at this point. The Volunteer Team established several medical posts at the crucial points where the students are launching their demonstration against the MPR (People's Consultative Assembly) Special Session. Right now the post at the Atmajaya Catholic University is the center for first aid treatment for the victims of military attack. Vigilantes who claim to protect the MPR Special Session were succesful in getting through the University and began attacking the groups which support the students and the community who are opposed to the MPR Special Session. The news will be updated regularly. From jkb at indo.net.id Sat Nov 14 23:42:01 1998 From: jkb at indo.net.id (Jaringan Kerja Budaya) Date: Sat, 14 Nov 1998 21:42:01 +0700 Subject: [asia-apec 886] ASSOCIATED PRESS, Six Killed in Indonesian Protests Message-ID: <1.5.4.16.19981114214406.2497901a@pop.indo.net.id> November 13, 1998 Six Killed in Indonesian Protests Filed at 12:53 p.m. EST By The Associated Press JAKARTA, Indonesia (AP) -- In the worst violence since riots toppled President Suharto in May, at least six people were killed today when Indonesian security forces battled rock-throwing protesters and street mobs attacked suspected police informers. Local media reports said the death toll could climb and that possibly several hundred had been injured in clashes with police, who fired plastic bullets, tear gas and water cannons at the protesters. Hospitals said their emergency rooms were full of bleeding students, many in critical condition with gunshot wounds. Pressed by the bloody protests raging outside, Indonesia's highest legislative body today endorsed a new government blueprint for the troubled nation. The 1,000-member People's Consultative Assembly also named Suharto in a decree demanding a massive government crackdown on corruption under his 32-year rule. As thousands of troops and police patrolled outside, the assembly voted unanimously to pass 11 of 12 reform decrees. A 12th decree passed 784-123 after a lengthy debate -- the first time in three decades that the assembly failed to reach total agreement on an issue. It backed a plan by President B.J. Habibie to hold parliamentary elections in May or June and to open the ballot to a wide range of new political parties. It set no election date, however. Assembly members, many of them holdovers from the authoritarian Suharto era, hailed the decrees as major reforms, pointing to their demands for greater human rights and economic restructuring. But students and other critics said they did not represent major democratic change and only entrenched the power of the status quo, including Habibie, the military, and the ruling Golkar Party. As the assembly met, violence raged in the capital. Mobs burned tires while baton-wielding soldiers dispersed the crowd. Armored personnel carriers rumbled along Jakarta's main boulevard, and troops fired warning shots, chasing thousands of protesters through Jakarta's downtown area, where offices and shops were closed. Molotov cocktails exploded in flames in front of police lines. Soldiers were seen firing what appeared to be blanks and plastic bullets into buildings at Atama Jaya Catholic University. Several students, some bleeding, were removed on stretchers. Tosik Sutina, a morgue official at the nearby Jakarta Hospital, said two bodies of male students were brought from the university with gunshot wounds to their chests. Other hospitals reported a steady stream of injured. Syaiful, a morgue attendant at Cipto Mungunkusomo Hospital, said it received the bodies of one male student and a civilian security guard. Both also had gunshot wounds to their chest. In East Jakarta, a mob beat a third man to death in a street while soldiers looked on. Witnesses reported dozens of other mob attacks against individuals accused of being police informers. The clashes followed two deaths -- a high school student and a police officer -- in similar street battles Thursday night in Jakarta. More than 100 students were hospitalized, some with serious injuries. The violence since Thursday night was the worst in Jakarta since riots forced Suharto to quit in May. Late today, a smiling Habibie was whisked past the protests in a heavily guarded motorcade to the Parliament, where he closed the four-day assembly. He expressed his condolences for the deaths of the student protesters saying they were the ``victims of the process of reform'' that would bring Indonesia a better future. Today's approval of a new political blueprint for Indonesia comes as the country battles its worst economic crisis in decades. Inflation, unemployment and poverty rates are soaring. The assembly's aim for total consensus stumbled when the Islamic-oriented United Development Party refused to put its name to a decree calling for only a gradual reduction of the 75-seat military representation in the 500-seat Parliament. The United Development Party, which backs student demands for an immediate end to the military's political role, staged an unprecedented protest walkout when the issue was debated. Military commander Gen. Wiranto had warned that an estimated 30,000 police and troops deployed across the capital would take ``firmer action'' if student protests again got out of control. Clashes continued into the night. From amittal at foodfirst.org Wed Nov 18 03:57:44 1998 From: amittal at foodfirst.org (Anuradha Mittal) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1998 10:57:44 -0800 Subject: [asia-apec 887] URGENT ACTION ALERT from the Northern California Coalition for Immigrant Rights Message-ID: URGENT ACTION ALERT from the Northern California Coalition for Immigrant Rights Our brothers and sisters in Central America need your help! Urgent efforts to help the Hurricane Mitch victims continue. Because of this Hurricane; almost 10,000 people were killed, more than 10,000 disappeared and more than 2 million displaced. The Central American Relief Aid (CARA) is a Bay Area collaborative sponsored by community agencies, and Immigrant Rights groups. Relief for Central Americans in the U. S.! The Clinton Administration will be deciding whether to grant Temporary Protected Status -TPS- to nationals from Honduras, Nicaragua, ElSalvador and Guatemala- countries affected by Hurricane Mitch. White House staffers indicated last week that they are reviewing options including granting TPS for 6 months, with the understanding that some countries impacted (Honduras and Nicaragua were noted) may need, and thus would be candidates for, an extension of TPS. As of today, the Administration is waiting to hear from their embassies about conditions in the four countries. Based on this evaluation, the Department of State will make a recommendation, and the decision will be made by the Attorney General. Please call the White House and Justice Department urging the Administration to grant TPS for eighteen months to Honduras, Nicaragua, El Salvador and Guatemala. At the White House, please contact Scott Busby of the National Security Council (202/456-9141) and Maria Echaveste, Deputy Chief Staff (202/456-1690). At the Justice Department, contact Eric Holder, Deputy Attorney General (202/514-2101), James Costello, Associate Deputy Attorney General (202/514-3392), and Wilfredo Ferrer in the Attorney General's office (202/514-2407). You may also sign on to a letter we are sending on behalf of Northern California organizations by providing us with the following information (by Friday, November 13, 5:00pm): Organization name ___________________________ Contact person _________________ Address __________________________________________________________________ (No. & Street) (Suite No.) (City) (State) (Zip Code) Tel. No. _________________ Fax No. __________________ e-mail ________________ For further information, please contact Edwin Rodriguez: (415) 243-8215, ext. 313 > Anuradha Mittal Policy Director Institute for Food and Development Policy - Food First 398 60th Street, Oakland, CA 94618 Phone: (510) 654-4400 Fax: (510) 654-4551 http://www.foodfirst.org From amittal at foodfirst.org Wed Nov 18 06:34:00 1998 From: amittal at foodfirst.org (Anuradha Mittal) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1998 13:34:00 -0800 Subject: [asia-apec 888] Food Rights Watch: News From India Message-ID: THE TIMES OF INDIA, November 17, 1998, page 7. Govt. will contest US patent on basmati New Delhi: The Union government will soon seek cancellation of the patent awarded to an American company on basmati rice attorney-general Soli J. Sorabjee told the supreme court on Monday. The best legal brains in the US and 15 to 20 scientists are involved in the whole exercise to move for the cancellation of the US patent granted on basmati rice. He refused to elaborate, saying, "I do not want to reveal the strategy keeping in mind the resources of the US". Mr. Sorabjee also said the Bio-Diversity Bill, the Geographical Indicators Bill and the Plant Variety and Farmer's Rights Protection Bill were being framed to protect age-old Indian agricultural products from being patented by outsiders. The Plant Variety and Farmer's Rights Protection Bill is in the final stage of preparation and would be placed before Parliament during the winter session. Mr. Sorabjee told a bench of chief justice A.S. Anand, justice V.N. Khare and justice M. Srinivasan. Mr. Sorabjee said all the legislation drafted in this field had to keep in mind the trade-related intellectual property rights (TRIP) agreement and the government was doing its best to keep the nation's interest intact. He said by the Bio-Diversity Act, the government was contemplating prohibition of bio-piracy and through the Geographical Indicators Act, patenting of agricultural products known by place names like Darjeeling Tea would be prohibited from being patented by outsiders. The court was hearing a public interest petition filed by Research Foundation for Science, Technology and Economy seeking the court's direction to the government to challenge the patenting of basmati rice in the name of 'Texmati' by Rice Tech Corporation of the U.S. earlier this year. Mr. Sorabjee said various steps required for amendment of the Patents Act were also under the active consideration of the Union government, "Government is fully alive to the situation, its gravity and importance and is taking steps to protect the interests of the nation", Mr. Sorabjee assured the court. Petitioner's counsel Indira Jaising said the Union government should enact a law to prohibit and recognize any patent in genetic material in the agricultural field. The court disposed of the petition saying, "If there is any shortcoming in the Acts that were being prepared, it can be brought to the notice of the court". ******************************************************************* THE INDIAN EXPRESS, November 16, 1998, page 1. Centre opens up Indian fields to 'terminator gene' patent-holder By Sharita Rai Bangalore, Nov 15: The government of India has granted permission to Monsanto - the US patent-holder of the controversial terminator gene - to conduct 40 field trials across 5 Indian states. The trials involve the company's genetically engineered hybrid cotton seed, claimed to be resistant to the boll worm, a common pest known to represent 60 per cent of all pest attacks against cotton. The permission granted by Delhi pertains to Karnataka, Tamil Nadu, Andhra Pradesh, Maharashtra and Madhya Pradesh. In Karnataka, these trials must have been underway for the last three months. In the districts of Raichur, Bellary and Dharwad, the trials are said to have a "93 per cent success" allowing the company to anticipate that the BT [Bacillus thuringisis] gene-resistant hybrid variety will hit the Indian market in time for the Kharif season in the year 2000. A Mumbai-based joint venture, Monsanto-Mahyco Biotech Pty Ltd [MMB], was set up 6 months ago for manufacturing and marketing the hybrid seed. Monsanto owns a 26 per cent stake in MMB. IN THE DARK: Curiously, though agriculture is a state subject, the Karnataka government seems unaware of the trials going on in the state. 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 - Karnataka or Maharashtra. (The Indian Express correspondents, however, found it quite easy to get this information). Sources, who claimed these trials were being conducted in large private holdings, were unwilling to identify the specific sites or the extent of land over which these trials were taking place. But it is being done with the permission of the individual farmer, they said. FIELD TRIALS: Even more curious is the fact that the University of Agricultural Sciences (UAS) had turned down the company's suggestion for allowing field trials on its campus of hybrid seeds developed at the Indian Institute of Science (IISc) before releasing them for further trials on actual farm holdings. (In a controversial decision the IISc has allowed lab facilities to Monsanto). According to experts at the UAS, a team has visited the university recently and met the Vice-Chancellor to discuss possible arrangements for collaboration with them. The university was told that the seed development at the IISc , which had given land to the company on a lease basis, would be brought there for proper evaluation. Even as IISc officials are not forthcoming on the nature of the agreement with Monsanto in this regard, experts at UAS are concerned about the lack of transparency regarding the whole venture. The discussions that Monsanto held with UAS officials regarding the development of transgenic plants, however, fell through in the light of the "terminator gene" controversy. Also, the UAS was not interested in the development of pest-resistant hybrid cotton seed but rather in developing a hybrid that would save the red gram from the equally common pest - the pod borer. "While cotton was their priority since it is grown extensively in the districts of Bijapur and Gulbarga" admitted a UAS scientist. Anuradha Mittal Policy Director Institute for Food and Development Policy - Food First 398 60th Street, Oakland, CA 94618 Phone: (510) 654-4400 Fax: (510) 654-4551 http://www.foodfirst.org From appasec at tm.net.my Wed Nov 18 14:13:53 1998 From: appasec at tm.net.my (appasec) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 13:13:53 +0800 Subject: [asia-apec 889] Unity Statement of the APPA Message-ID: <015b01be12b2$3df68f80$0100a8c0@tmnet.tm.net.my> UNITY STATEMENT OF ASIA PACIFIC PEOPLES? ASSEMBLY NOVEMBER 14, 1998 KUALA LUMPUR We, 636 participants representing 316 organizations from 30 countries, have gathered here in Kuala Lumpur for the Asia Pacific People?s Assembly from the 7th to the 15th of November 1998 on the occasion of the 6th APEC Leaders Meeting. We have come to confront the issue of globalization, and in particular the APEC as an instrument to implement it, in order to strengthen our understanding and resistance, and reassert people?s rights. Neo-liberal globalization is the response of monopoly capital to the global crisis. Liberalization and deregulation of markets and investments, and privatization of public utilities and services have been imposed to expand TNC business and increase super-profits. Globalization is being promoted through the myth of unlimited growth by giving free rein to business and the "free" market. The IMF-WB, and the WTO act as the main instruments of the superpowers to impose neoliberal policies. The APEC, like other regional and plurilateral formations such as the OECD, has been organized to hasten the process of globalization by strengthening business ? government partnership in enforcing specific action programs and policies that enhance liberalization through trade and investments facilitation, enforcing policy commitments to liberalization and "economic cooperation". Further the TNCs themselves are the most important driving force of globalization in their unquenchable thirst for super profits. But the Mexican crisis, then the Asian crisis and now the global crisis have shown us the resultant collapse and ugly side of speculative finance and as a result have debunked the myths of globalization. The major points in the agenda of APEC now are how to rationalize the failure of globalization in the Asia Pacific and pursue even greater liberalization as a response to the crisis. The state has been redesigned and its role manipulated in order to meet the demands of monopoly capital and the local ruling elites of big landowners and big business and divesting the state of its social responsibility. The economic crisis has destabilized the hegemony of monopoly capital and particularly, the power sharing of US, Japan and the European Union in the region. It has also brought about political crisis and intensified popular resistance from all sectors of the people of Asia and the Pacific. As a result there is increased defense spending and militarization in the Asia-Pacific countries. There are also efforts to strengthen the US-Japan military alliance through the New Guidelines for Defense Cooperation between the US and Japan, maintenance of US bases in Okinawa, Japan and South Korea, and the return of US military presence in the Philippines. However far from its promise of jobs and progress, globalization has resulted in widespread unemployment, displacement of peoples and destruction of their livelihoods, marginalization of large sections of society, intensified discrimination and repression as well as the disintegration of families and communities. Far from its promise of development, globalization has wrecked societies, destroyed economies and financial systems. It has destroyed production systems, resources and the environment, destroyed the means of subsistence of small entrepreneurs and producers and brought then to ruin and has led to famine conditions in many countries in Asia and the Pacific. It has brought peoples and countries to greater poverty and misery. Globalization thrives on the promotion of an ideology of consumerism, individualism and patriarchy among the people enshrined in globalist monoculture. It has also brought about the emergence of dangerous forces promoting narrow, chauvinist-nationalist anti-globalization platforms that have intensified social conflicts and politics of fundamentalism, neo-fascism and xenophobia. The appropriation of land through landgrabbing by mining, logging and agro-industrial TNCs; by tourist and real estate development projects and by shifting from sustainable food production to export monocrops; as well as displacement by hydro-electric and other mega-maldevelopment projects have increased landlessness of the peasants and indigenous peoples. The fisherfolk are deprived of their livelihood, and access to aquatic resources because of commercial and corporatized aquaculture, large-scale commercial fishing, landgrabbing, and conversion of fishery areas to non-productive purposes, as well as the degradation of the aquatic environment due to industrial pollution and chemical use. Corporatized agriculture dependent on high-yielding monocultures and industrial chemical inputs has destroyed food security, endangers human health and destroys the environment irreversibly. Food security is further threatened by the destruction of local food production, the widespread landlessness and displacement of peasants, the loss of biodiversity and indigenous knowledge, the new and fast expansion of genetic engineering and the dumping of agricultural supply from Northern countries. Globalization has resulted in massive rural displacement and, along with concentrated maldevelopment in the cities, has resulted in intense urban migration. In the burgeoning cities, the urban poor face joblessness, and homelessness as well as forced evictions due to megamall development projects and urban land speculation. With greater mobility of capital, workers rights, wages and working conditions have been extremely eroded. The crisis has led to mass layoffs and unemployment. Greater exploitation of labour is realized through neoliberal methods of union busting, and the promotion of contract work, casual work, home-based work, and labor flexibility. Increased joblessness has intensified labor migration. The thirst for more profits through lower labor costs has resulted in the increase of trafficked labor, women and child labor. Women suffer most from globalization. It has intensified discrimination and degradation of women. They are pushed to migration in greater numbers and they are forced to enter into extremely exploitative working conditions and trafficked into the sex trade. Privatization of health care violates women?s right to total well-being by denying them access to safe, appropriate, affordable and quality preventive and curative health care. More and more, they are facing extreme forms of discrimination, violence and rape, which are increasingly being used as tools for subjugation by men and the state. The future of the youth and students is threatened by globalization. Access to people-centered quality education has been limited by commercialization, which has raised the costs and narrowed the curriculum to serve the interests of capital. Student organizing and dissent, as well as their efforts to find solidarity with the people?s movements, are systematically and violently suppressed. Indigenous peoples are denied of their right to self-determination. They are violently displaced and deprived of their land to give way to maldevelopment projects, and TNC mining, oil and gas exploration and logging business. To accelerate this process, their territories are militarized. Tourism projects commercialize and denigrate their culture. Community rights over their biological and genetic resources as well as their indigenous knowledge are trampled upon. Trade liberalization is destroying our natural resources. Governments in crisis are selling off non-renewable and scarce resources including forests and water as a way out of the crisis. Globalization has accelerated environmental abuse the world over, intensifying the destruction of various ecosystems and, with it, the people?s livelihood. The full realization of the people?s human rights should be the primary objective of economic arrangements. However, economic, political, civil, social and cultural rights are violated by the state and monopoly capital with impunity. As the people resist and assert their rights, they are met with violent suppression by the state. Under the guise of political stability, repressive laws, together with the control of the judiciary, tighten the grip of the state and promote dictatorship. We vehemently resist globalization as we struggle for equality, peoples? democratic rights and sovereignty, self-determination, social justice, people-centered development and welfare. Fight to reverse neo-liberal globalization and put an end to its policies of liberalization and deregulation of trade and investment and privatization of public assets and services. Expose, resist and reject APEC. Other multilateral instruments of globalization like the IMF, World Bank, the GATT, WTO and recently the MAI as well as other multi-lateral instruments such as regional associations that, in various ways, contribute to globalization must also be thoroughly exposed in order that they be dismantled along with the APEC. The TNCs must also be dismantled and the state must be challenged and their efforts to promote neo-liberal globalization must be resisted and overcome. What we need is genuine cooperation among peoples and countries of the Asia Pacific, and uphold the peoples? sovereignty and right to self-determination. 1. We reaffirm the universality and indivisibility of our rights as enshrined in the UN Declaration of Human Rights, and in various UN and ILO conventions. But these are not being enforced; they are being breached with impunity and states are not being made accountable. We assert our rights, forward the struggle and strengthen the people?s movements. 2. We must develop broad information campaigns and intensive education to promote people-centered actions, organize at all levels of oppressed communities and sectors and continue the resistance through creative political actions at the local and national level, as well as pursue community level alternatives. 3. We seek different levels of alliances with different groups and build international solidarity to resist globalization and realize the people?s alternatives. We can not expect any government or TNC or international organization to do this for us, we have only ourselves, our strength, our unity and determination! From appasec at tm.net.my Wed Nov 18 14:16:50 1998 From: appasec at tm.net.my (appasec) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 13:16:50 +0800 Subject: [asia-apec 890] Adopted resolutions of APPA Message-ID: <000001be12b2$bdb53280$0100a8c0@tmnet.tm.net.my> ADOPTED RESOLUTIONS OF THE ASIA-PACIFIC PEOPLES? ASSEMBLY November 14, 1998 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia 1. Stop military violence on the democratic movement in Indonesia. The Indonesian military continues the culture of violence to stop the protest actions by the Indonesia people during the extraordinary session of the People?s Assembly. The extraordinary session was to reaffirm President Habibie?s present tenure as head of state and the general elections in 1999. The students and people were out on the streets everyday in the last few months and their protests intensified from 9th to 12th of November, to demand accountability of former President Suharto and an investigation into his wealth; the ending of the dual-function of the military; and an independent Election Commission for the upcoming elections. However, the peaceful demonstrations by the students and the people were brutally suppressed by the Indonesian military using sticks, tear gas, bullets and tanks. The Malaysian newspapers claim nine students died and over a hundred were injured. Sources in Indonesia, confirm that another person from Tangerang (district area border in Jakarta), one police and one student from Bandung Technology Institute have also died. Three students from Jakarta remain in critical condition in the hospital and there were three journalists whose legs were broken. This latest action by the Indonesian military is a violation of all basic human rights, particularly the right of peaceful assembly and expression. This shows that the present regime is no different from the Suharto regime, but merely a continuation, to repress the people and democratic movement in this country. We, the participants of APPA, PROTEST and CONDEMN this use of violence by the Indonesian military and police. We demand for the Indonesia government to: 1.. Immediately and accurately announce the number of victims who have died or been injured during the protest on November 12, 1998; 2.. Immediately set up an independent fact-finding mission to investigate the violence perpetrated by the Indonesian military and to be transparent in its reporting. 3.. Immediately stop all violence and security approaches by the military in handling the demonstrations and rallies by the people who only want to express their rights through peaceful assembly; 4.. Immediately ratify the International Convenant on Civil and Political Rights. 2. Stop the Multilateral Agreement on Investments (MAI) from going into the World Trade Organisation (WTO) The Global Coordination Against the MAI Going into the WTO has announced that November 20 will be a Global Day of Protest Against the MAI. We, the participants of APPA, endorse and support this Global Day of Protest Against the MAI. 3. 50th Anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights - Ratification of Covenants On the occasion of the 50th Anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which is the principal instrument in the International Bill of Human Rights, we, the participants of APPA, urge Malaysia, and all other nations which have not ratified the legal instruments of the International Bill of Human Rights, to ratify the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and also the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. 1.. On Malaysia We, the participants of APPA: -call on the Malaysian government to immediately free all political prisoners without condition; -to abolish the Internal Security Act and all other repressive laws; and -to respect the freedoms of assembly, speech, and association. The participants unanimously express our resolute solidarity with the people?s struggle in Malaysia. 2.. On the rights of Indigenous Peoples, Mexico We, the participants of APPA, strongly condemn the violation of the human rights of the Indigenous Peoples of Mexico, particularly the indigenous peoples of Chiapas; and we unanimously demand that the Mexican Government comply with the Human Rights Charter and the commitments within the San Andres agreements related to peace talks, and also the immediate implementation of the Pacific resolutions. We strongly condemn the militarization of the indigenous territory of Chiapas. 6. On Tibet We, the participants of APPA; -condemn China for the persistent violations of human rights and fundamental freedoms in Chinese-occupied Tibet for the past more than four decades -deplore the fact that the international community, including the United Nations, has failed to bring about an end to the suffering of the six million Tibetan people -are deeply concerned with the incommunicado detention of Gedhum Choekyi Nyima, the Eleventh Panchen Lama of Tibet, the world?s youngest political prisoner; -support His Holiness the Dalai Lama for his continued stand on the non-violent approach to resolve human conflicts in the spirit of reconciliation and compromise; We earnestly call upon the Chinese leadership to open unconditional negotiations with the Tibetan government in Exile for the realization of human rights and fundamental freedoms in Tibet. We agree to contact our local embassies when we return. 1.. On Africa Capitalist globalisation is taking a heavy toll on the human lives and environment of Africa. Increasingly people are losing control of their land and natural resources. Transnational corporations are endangering food security and weakening the ability of people to even feed themselves. Internal civil strife and ethnic conflicts are the tragic manifestations of this situation. Especially damaging are the effects of WTO-led liberalisation and deregulation of African economies. African governments are compromised because of structural adjustment programmes and their psychology of dependence on donors. However, the peoples of Africa, especially factory workers, poor peasants, individual workers, students, and all other progressive sections of society fighting for a more just, euitable and self-determined future. We, the participants of APPA, support the struggle of the peoples of Africa for the defense of their land, natural resources and cultural sovereignity. And, we stand in solidarity in their struggle in their struggle against imperialist globalisation. 2.. On the United States of America We, the participants of APPA, condemn the role of the Government of the United States of America in violating the human rights of the peoples? of the Asia-Pacific by supporting anti-people regimes sympathetic to the American neoliberal policies. 3.. On the Mirrar People, Australia We, the participants of APPA, extend support to the Mirrar people in their just struggles to prevent the multinational E.R.A. from mining uranium on Mirrar land at Jabiluka in Kakado National Park. We recognize the justice of the mirrar peoples claims to self-determination and call on the Australian government to respect these claims. 10. Stop the World Bank financed dam near Ramancherry, Tamil Nadu Ramancherry is a village situated in Tamil Nadu State, India where the state government plans, through an agreement with neighbouring Andara State, to construct a reservoir on the Krishna River. The project is supported by the World Bank. Ten villages in Tamil Nadu and three villages in Andra State will be affected by this reservoir project. The affected villagers were never consulted. The government told the people to vacate the villages. They will be uprooted from their own villages and place of birth. 25,000 people live in these villages and 4,800 acres will be affected. We, the participants of APPA, demand that the World Bank withdraw all support for the project and all other dam schemes, and we pledge our solidarity with the affected villagers and their struggle for justice. 11. On the Nisga?a People, Canada The Nisga?a are indigenous people of British Columbia, Canada. For over a century, they have been fighting for their sovereignty and for the land that was wrongfully taken from them. We, the participants of APPA give our full support and solidarity to their struggle for self-determination. From gattwd at corso.ch.planet.gen.nz Wed Nov 18 15:57:41 1998 From: gattwd at corso.ch.planet.gen.nz (Gatt Watchdog) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 18:57:41 +1200 Subject: [asia-apec 891] Apec planners keep eye on security row Message-ID: New Zealand Herald, Auckland, 31 October 1998 Apec planners keep eye on security row Inquiry into demonstrations at last year's summit rocks Canada By Andrew Stone Senior Apec planners are carefully watching a security scandal rocking the Canadian Government as it may have a bearing on next September's Auckland summit. The reputation of the Canadian Prime Minister, Jean Chretien, is taking a pounding as damaging evidence emerges at an inquiry into the pepper-spraying of student demonstrators at last year's Apec meeting in Vancouver. The clash between police and protesters was run-of-the-mill, with 38 arrests near the scene of the leaders' retreat. However, the fallout 11 months later has become a political firestorm that New Zealand officials are monitoring. Leaked documents suggest that Canadian authorities planted spies among demonstrators, arrested student leaders without charge and bent over backwoards to spare former Indonesian leader President Suharto political embarrassment. While Canadian officials went as far as to apologise to Indonesia in advance for anti-Suharto posters on Vancouver streets, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police were fighting their own battle against a decision to allow foreign armed security agents into Canada with the Apec leaders. The Mounties were particularly hostile towards Indonesian agents, with documents suggesting the Canadians were preparing to shoot the twitchy Suharto guards, who had upset their hosts by asking if they could open fire on demonstrators if protests disturbed the Indonesian strongman. New Zealand security planners will not have the Suharto headache next year as the Asian dictator has stepped down. But they will have to accept the presence of armed bodyguards, with the Government preparing a law change permitting them to carry concealed weapons. Police here can also expect pressure from foreign delegations determined to run their own show. The Canadian inquiry has shed light on United States Secret Service demands over measures to protect President Bill Clinton in Vancouver, with the Americans wanting extra guns, a special armoured limousine and dozens of extra agents during the three-day visit. Superintendent Peter Marshall, police operations commander for the Auckland Apec meeting, confirmed that planners had an interest in the inquiry outcome. "Whether the issues arising from the inquiry are relevant to the New Zealand environment will become clearer as time progresses." He said "lawful and reasonable" protests would be permitted in Auckland, but demonstrators would not be allowed in no-go areas. ____________________________________________________________________ The Dominion, Wellington 11 November 1998 Law change will permit armed Apec bodyguards By Cathie Bell, Political Reporter The Government is to amend the law to enable foreign armed bodyguards to accompany leaders at the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation forum in Auckland next year. The change is to ease the concerns of American authorities who threatened that the United States might not attend if bodyguards could not carry weapons. The law has been circumvented previously by swearing in foreign bodyguards as members of the police. But the Government does not believe this will work for Apec as it would be "unrealistic" to expect bodyguards from republics to swear the oath of allegiance to the Queen which police officers make. Foreign Affairs and Trade Minister Don McKinnon and Police Minister Clem Simich said yesterday that the Arms Act amendment would enable selected bodyguards accompanying some world leaders at Apec meetings to carry guns. Police Commissioner Peter Doone would personally issue permits to the approved bodyguards. That approval would specify what weapons and how many could be carried at what times. The ministers said the permits would be given only to world leaders who needed private protection. Neither they nor Mr Doone would say who those leaders were but background information they made public mentions the leaders of the United States, Russia, and China in particular. Alliance spokesman Matt Robson said the Government was opening the door for "a gunfight at the OK Corral". "This raises the risk of law-abiding New Zealand citizens being shot down in their own country by a jumpy secret service agent." That suggestion is not as outlandish as it might appear - the Canadian Mounties were told by Indonesian security guards at the Vanccouver Apec meeting last year that they would open fire if protesters got too close to now-deposed leader General Suharto. Mr Doone would not say what type of weapons he would approve but permitted weaponry would most likely be pistols. The Heckler and Koch pistol is understood to be one of the guns favoured by foreign security forces. Legislation would be passed to block public access to places in Auckland where Apec activities would take place. That would be mainly around the Aotea Centre, the old town Hall, the Carlton Hotel, and around the Auckland Domain during the leaders' retreat. Mr McKinnon said the law change was not something the Government was taking lightly. "Apec is an unprecedented event for New Zealand. We are expecting the world leaders of 20 economies to visit. the event requires a level of security we have never had to provide before". From pspd at soback.kornet.nm.kr Wed Nov 18 19:05:06 1998 From: pspd at soback.kornet.nm.kr (PSPD) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 19:05:06 +0900 Subject: [asia-apec 892] Korea conference on TNCs in December Message-ID: <36529BD1.F67CDC73@soback.kornet.nm.kr> Invitation letter : -International Conference on Human Rights in the Context of the Social Responsibility of Companies - Korean House for International Solidarity(KHIS) in People's Solidarity for Participatory Democracy(PSPD) has been monitoring Korean companies abroad which have violated labor and human rights since 1995. KHIS has conducted field research- fact finding - in China Vietnam and Indonesia every year, written letters of appeal to companies, organized seminars and street campaigns for public awareness. Recently, KHIS began organizing a street campaign every weekend to promote the writing of protest postcards as well as collect small funds for illegally dismissed workers since the summer of 1998. Especially, many students and young people are interested in and support this campaign. This is because name brands such as Nike, Reebok, Adidas are popular with this group of people, and these companies tend to violate women, children, and labor rights(such as low-wages and unsafe working conditions, among others) Many of these famous name brand companies subcontract to Korean companies from Indonesia, China, Vietnam, Srilanka and Central . KHIS has organised international conference every two years on independent monitoring of Korean companies abroad. This year's conference will be held on 12-13 December in Sokang University(not yet confirmed ) with the participation of various social organizations including trade unions, labour, women, citizen, human rights, youth, consumer organizations. During the conference, host organizations will address NGOs condes of conduct against companies codes of conduct and action program in the each area like woman, labour union, enviornmental group, younth group and indenpendent monitoring sysytem. Also we will invite workers from shoe and clothing companies who worked from TNCs like Nike and Carfu and Sony. An important part of this conference is the Cultural Event and Solidarity program with Asian trainees who work in Korean companies abroad. It is an opportunity for conference participants to share their experiences, culture, food, etc. The event will also be a space to discuss building a network to monitor Korean companies abroad in the Asian region. Attached is a conference program and a PSPD brochure. sincealy yours Serapina Cha, Mi-kyung International Conference on Human Rights and Green Consumerism in the Context of the Social Responsibility of Companies 1. Conference Goals ? Evaluate the monitoring of Korean companies abroad and discussion of how to raise the social responsibilities of companies ? Create a declaration and campaign for fair trade and human rights companies ? Prepare a domestic network for human rights and green consumerism ? Publicize ways to conduct education for youth ? Create a network of southeast and east Asian laborers working in Korean companies abroad ? Develop codes of conduct and independent monitoring 2. Program December 12-13, 1998 December 12(Sat) : Morning Session ?Presentation of 1998 Field Research Reports Experts on Vietnam, China, and Indonesia ?International Guest Speaker(unconfirmed) Afternoon Session ?Discussion on Codes of Conduct ?Presentation of Case Study of Europe's Clean Clothes Campaign December 13(Sun) : Morning Session ? Discussion and Declaration Ceremony on Codes of Conduct ? Disucssion posssible action program and responsibily for women and enviromental and youth groups ? Evaluation and Discussion on Future Solidarity Efforts Afternoon Session (3 or 4 - 8 p.m.) Culture Night with Foreign Trainees We are very happy to invite you and join for the seminar. If you want to join it, please contact us. KHIS Tel : 822-723-4255 Fax : 822-723-5055 e-mail: pspd@sobcak.kornet.nm.kr cc: Host organiziation of conference will be consisted by about 15 groups from civic, human rights, trade union, women, envrionmental groups, youth and consummer groups. From pspd at soback.kornet.nm.kr Wed Nov 18 19:19:19 1998 From: pspd at soback.kornet.nm.kr (PSPD) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 19:19:19 +0900 Subject: [asia-apec 893] Korea Conference on TNCs of Korea in Decemeber - invitation letter Message-ID: <36529F27.3624D0A8@soback.kornet.nm.kr> International Conference on Human Rights in the Context of the Social Responsibility of Companies Korean House for International Solidarity(KHIS) in People's Solidarity for Participatory Democracy(PSPD) has been monitoring Korean companies abroad which have violated labor and human rights since 1995. KHIS has conducted field research- fact finding - in China Vietnam and Indonesia every year, written letters of appeal to companies, organized seminars and street campaigns for public awareness. Recently, KHIS began organizing a street campaign every weekend to promote the writing of protest postcards as well as collect small funds for illegally dismissed workers since the summer of 1998. Especially, many students and young people are interested in and support this campaign. This is because name brands such as Nike, Reebok, Adidas are popular with this group of people, and these companies tend to violate women, children, and labor rights(such as low-wages and unsafe working conditions, among others) Many of these famous name brand companies subcontract to Korean companies from Indonesia, China, Vietnam, Srilanka and Central . KHIS has organised international conference every two years on independent monitoring of Korean companies abroad. This year's conference will be held on 12-13 December in Sokang University(not yet confirmed ) with the participation of various social organizations including trade unions, labour, women, citizen, human rights, youth, consumer organizations. During the conference, host organizations will address NGOs condes of conduct against companies codes of conduct and action program in the each area like woman, labour union, enviornmental group, younth group and indenpendent monitoring sysytem. Also we will invite workers from shoe and clothing companies who worked from TNCs like Nike and Carfu and Sony. An important part of this conference is the Cultural Event and Solidarity program with Asian trainees who work in Korean companies abroad. It is an opportunity for conference participants to share their experiences, culture, food, etc. The event will also be a space to discuss building a network to monitor Korean companies abroad in the Asian region. Attached is a conference program and a PSPD brochure. sincealy yours Serapina Cha, Mi-kyung International Conference on Human Rights and Green Consumerism in the Context of the Social Responsibility of Companies 1. Conference Goals ? Evaluate the monitoring of Korean companies abroad and discussion of how to raise the social responsibilities of companies ? Create a declaration and campaign for fair trade and human rights companies ? Prepare a domestic network for human rights and green consumerism ? Publicize ways to conduct education for youth ? Create a network of southeast and east Asian laborers working in Korean companies abroad ? Develop codes of conduct and independent monitoring 2. Program December 12-13, 1998 December 12(Sat) : Morning Session ?Presentation of 1998 Field Research Reports Experts on Vietnam, China, and Indonesia ?International Guest Speaker(unconfirmed) Afternoon Session ?Discussion on Codes of Conduct ?Presentation of Case Study of Europe's Clean Clothes Campaign December 13(Sun) : Morning Session ? Discussion and Declaration Ceremony on Codes of Conduct ? Disucssion posssible action program and responsibily for women and enviromental and youth groups ? Evaluation and Discussion on Future Solidarity Efforts Afternoon Session (3 or 4 - 8 p.m.) Culture Night with Foreign Trainees We are very happy to invite you and join for the seminar. If you want to join it, please contact us. KHIS Tel : 822-723-4255 Fax : 822-723-5055 e-mail: pspd@sobcak.kornet.nm.kr cc: Host organiziation of conference will be consisted by about 15 groups from civic, human rights, trade union, women, envrionmental groups, youth and consummer groups. From amc at HK.Super.NET Thu Nov 19 13:28:19 1998 From: amc at HK.Super.NET (AMC) Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1998 12:28:19 +0800 Subject: [asia-apec 894] Final Statement: 4th Intl Migrant Forum on APEC Message-ID: <3.0.32.19981119115940.006ef830@pop.hk.super.net> 17 November 1998 Dear Friends, Following is the final statement of the APPA 1998 Migrant Forum which was co-organised by Tenaganita, Asian Migrant Centre, and the Migrant Forum in Asia. The report/summary proceedings of the Migrant Forum is still being processed and will be sent later. Thank you for everyone's support and participation. Rex Varona Asian Migrant Centre *********** Final Statement of the 4th International Migrant Forum on APEC 1998 Asia Pacific People's Assembly on APEC 11-12 November 1998, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia We are migrants' groups and advocates who have come together for the 4th International Migrant Forum on APEC, focusing on the theme "Asserting Migrant Workers' Rights in a Globalized Economy". We meet at a time when the neoliberal global crisis continues to threaten basic survival, negate human dignity and erode the quality of life. We've come together to draw strength and inspiration from each other in our common struggle for social and economic justice. In 1995 we declared that: "Genuine development must be centered on the needs of people and nature, and deliver real social and economic justice. The form of indiscriminate, unregulated economic growth and trade which APEC advocates delivers the opposite: ecologically unsustainable growth." In 1996 we declared that "globalization in the forms advocated by APEC must be rejected." We committed ourselves to "imagine and construct an alternative world based on fundamental principles respecting human rights and human dignity." In 1997, we recognized the havoc wrought by the Asian economic crisis. And that "..in all parts of the world , human rights are under attack, irreversible damage done to the environment; social programs dismantled or privatized..." Neoliberal globalization has led to the unprecedented collapse of the economies in Asia. It continues to manifest itself in various parts of the world. Today in Asia, we face: 1. Historic levels of joblessness. In 7 Asian countries (excluding China and South Asia), 26 million workers are already without jobs; four million more face unemployment by the end of 1998; one million migrant workers face deportation within this year. 2. Massive impoverishment. The magnitude and intensity of poverty resulting from the crisis has increased food insecurity, including famines in certain parts of Asia. Some Asian governments claim that the crisis has reduced the standard of living by 20 years. Social inequities have also deepened. One direct effect is the intensification of rural-urban and international labor migration. The crisis, however, has differential impacts on social classes. Worst hit by the crisis are the peasants, workers, migrants, women, indigenous peoples and the marginalized. 3. Deepened economic distortions and structural defects. Amidst the poverty, there is a crisis of overproduction especially of goods for export. Global corporate capital has made use of the crisis by gaining greater control of strategic industries through "vulture funds" (telecommunications, power, transportation, banking). 4. Heightened social tensions. Conflicts between ethnic groups have erupted in racial violence. Tensions have grown between women and men, migrants and local workers, between religious groups, etc. 5. Intensified discrimination against migrants. This is exemplified in more restrictive and discriminatory laws and policies against migrants, reduction or non-payment of wages/benefits specifically targeting migrant workers, confinement of migrant workers to low-paying and 3D jobs (dirty, dangerous, demeaning). Migrants have been used as scapegoats for the economic difficulties, stealing local jobs, spreading diseases, and rising criminality. 6. Significant rise in violations of migrants' human rights. Now more than ever, migrant workers have become a disposable factor in production. The violations and abuses against migrants are exacerbated by the almost absolute deregulation of the labour industry. We find recent mass arrests, raids and detention as well as forcible mass deportation of migrant workers reprehensible and condemnable. 7. Institutionalized commodification of human labor on a global scale. Trade in human labor in various forms (e.g. trafficking in women and children) is now one of the most profitable, albeit exploitative, industries in the world. Intense competition among monopoly capitalists feeds on the use and exploitation of cheap, controllable labor, specially migrants. People's resistance is critical in stopping this destruction. The widespread suffering resulting from neoliberal globalization and the crises impel people to continue the struggle against globalization. Our challenges As migrant groups, advocates and non-government organizations, we commit ourselves to: 1. Continue to make governments, labor traders, international financial and corporate bodies accountable for violations of human rights and the impacts of globalization; 2. Develop forms of resistance that complement and reinforce our strength at the international, regional and national levels; 3. Continue to fight and address violations of migrant workers' human rights; 4. Intensify education and organizing work among migrant workers to challenge globalization; help develop initiatives by migrant workers; 5. Create alternative sustainable economic models, processes and practices that will challenge/replace globalization; 6. Broaden and strengthen our alliances and solidarity across classes, sectors, nationalities; 7. Launch coordinated initiatives to build/strengthen popular movements and political momentum against globalization. 8. Develop lifestyles and relationships that promote, and are consistent with, these alternative, sustainable models/systems. More concretely, the 1998 migrant forum has resolved to jointly do the following: 1. Campaign for the ratification and the enforcement of the UN Conventions; lobby embassies and governments. 2. Monitor the violations of migrants' rights, especially with respect to deportation of migrant workers. 3. Due to the large number of migrant workers in Malaysia, establish crisis centre(s) which are capable of dealing with crucial problems of migrant workers and can provide round-the-clock services; 4. Facilitate a regional consultation on the increasing human rights violations against women migrant workers especially in the informal sector (sex workers, entertainers, domestic workers). 5. Take the pro-active measure of organizing a regional consultation of stakeholders from South Asian Association Regional Cooperation - the next region to be hit by the economic crisis. 6. Support campaigns against wage cuts for migrant workers, e.g. in Hong Kong. 7. Organize coordinated activities, publicize actions and mark December 18 of each year as the International Solidarity Day with Migrant Workers and their Families. 8. Evaluate and monitor pre-departure and post-arrival orientation programs so that these emphasize migrants' human rights, gender and reproductive rights, health issues and the social costs/dimensions of migration. 9. Develop reintegration programs that promote sustainable economic/social alternatives, improve the quality of life of migrant workers and their families; link up with initiatives/networks working for such alternatives e.g. farmers and women's movements, and community livelihood/savings projects. Approved by the participants of the 4th International Migrant Forum on APEC, 12 November 1998, Stanford Hotel, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Overseas participants: 1. Kanlungan Centre Foundation (Philippines) -- Mary Lou Alcid 2. Unlad-Kabayan Migrant Services Foundation (Philippines) -- Mayan Villalba 3. Mehlika Hoodboy (U.S.A.) 4. Padmini Wirasurya (Sri Lanka) 5. Joint Committee for Migrant Workers in Korea (South Korea) - Rev. Park Chung-Ung, Yi Yoon-joo, Jeong Yunshik 6. Asia Pacific Mission for Migrant Filipinos (Asia) -- Ramon Mari Bultron, Joy de Guzman 7. Asian Migrant Centre (Asia) -- Rex Varona, Bien Molina Jr. 8. Migrant Forum in Asia Secretariat (Asia) -- Henry Jun Wah Lee 9. CARE (Cambodia) -- Sian Soth, Tep Money 10. Asia Pacific Meeting of the Religious (Taiwan) -- Sr. Digma Luz Trocio 11. Vancouver Status of Women (Canada) -- Sunera Thobani 12. Terminal 29 (Indonesia) -- Suprihatin 13. WARBE (Bangladesh) -- Syed Saiful Haque 14. Solidaritas Perempuan (Indonesia) -- Tati Krisnawati, Ida Cahyani, Wahyu Susilo, Veronica Indriani 15. HK Christian Industrial Committee (Hong Kong) / Taiwan -- Yi-Chi Chen 16. Migrante International (Philippines) -- Maria Fe, Imelda Laguindam 17. Graduate School for Social Transformation Studies (Taiwan) -- Hsias-Chuan Hsia 18. Center for Indonesian Migrant Workers (Indonesia) -- Nurul Qoiriah, Carla June Natan 19. Alternative Law research and Development Center (Philippines) -- Alvin C. Batalla 20. National Forum for Migrant Workers' Right (India) -- Bharati Paula Pflug 21. ALAC (Philippines) -- Carla Rita Padilla 22. Solidarity Centre for Migrants (Japan) -- Emmanuel Rosales, Keiko Tanahara 23. Asian-Pacific Forum for Law and Development (Bangladesh) -- Hameeda Hossain 24. Human Rights Watch (U.S.A.) -- Jeannine Guthri 25. Christian Commission for Development in Bangladesh (Bangladesh) -- Joachim Victor Gomez 26. Domestic Workers Movement (India) -- Jeanne Devos 27. Philippine Women's Forum on APEC (Philippines) -- Gina Alunan Melgar 28. Kantor Advokat/Pengacara Dan Konsultan Hukum -- Maria Titiek P. Angesti, SH. MBA, Saharuddin Satar, SH. MBA Local Participants 1. Tenaganita -- Irene Fernandez, Aegile Fernandez, Sharuna Verghis, Minder Kaur, Nirmala Saras, Pavani, Shobha, Harris Odilliya, Anja Rudnick, Astrid Rosenboom, Madelijn de Klyne Gitanjali 2. UNDP 2000 -- Anwar Fazal 3. Indonesian Sociology Research -- Bambang Soeroso R. Moek 4. St. Anne's Chruch -- Madeline Cross 5. Asian Partnership on International Migration -- Shaira Shameem 6. St. Francis Xavier Church -- Rosemary Chong, Paul Dass 7. Legal Aid Center -- Leena Ghosh [end] Asian Migrant Centre 4 Jordan Road, Kowloon, Hong Kong Tel: (852) 2312-0031 Fax: (852) 2992-0111 E-mail: amc@hk.super.net Web: www.hk.super.net/~amc From amc at HK.Super.NET Thu Nov 19 13:28:22 1998 From: amc at HK.Super.NET (AMC) Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1998 12:28:22 +0800 Subject: [asia-apec 895] Declaration of Solidarity (Asia-Europe Consultation) Message-ID: <3.0.32.19981119122723.00775680@pop.hk.super.net> 18 November 1998 Dear Friends, Here is the text of the Declaration of Solidarity of the "Asia-Europe Consultation on Challenging Globalisation: Solidarity and Search for Alternatives", which was held in Hong Kong on 7-10 October 1998. This meeting was co-organised by the Asian Migrant Centre, Asia Monitor Resource Centre, Asia Alliance of YMCAs, Asian Human Rights Commission, Asian Regional Exchange for New Alternatives, Committee for Asian Women, Documentation for Action Groups in Asia; and was supported by EZE (Protestant Association for Cooperation in Development) and ICCO. The local host was the HK Baptist University Social Sciences Department. The summary proceedings will be published and sent out later. With our best wishes, Rex Varona Asian Migrant Centre **************** DECLARATION OF SOLIDARITY Final Statement of the Asia-Europe Joint Consultation on "Challenging Globalization: Solidarity and Search for Alternatives" Hong Kong, 7-10 October 1998 This Asia-Europe Joint Consultation on "Challenging Globalization: Solidarity and Search for Alternatives" takes place even as the 'Asian financial crisis' continues to deepen and spread across continents. The conference sees this Asian and world economic crisis in the context of globalization, as rooted in the structures, policies and politics that have been shaping the global economic order in the last three decades under the heading of neoliberalism. Globalization as a historic process is not new. It has been going on since the inception of the modern world market system. However, it has acquired new features with the breakdown of the Bretton Woods system in the early seventies and with the consequent emergence of finance capital as the primary moving force in the world market. The policy pursued by the OECD countries after the breakdown of the old financial order helped create new financial markets in the so-called 'emerging markets' in the South and Eastern Europe. At the same time, the new rules of the global market formulated primarily by the World Bank, IMF, and more recently, the WTO, and inspired by neoliberal economics have rendered the national policies of some countries and regions irrelevant, exposing the most vulnerable sectors of society to the mercy of the market while favoring only a few. In some cases, whole countries have been marginalized and their development status thrown back by as much as 20 years. The issue of the loss of national sovereignty to the transnational companies today is much more complex since the transnational companies have not only grown in power but have also managed to manipulate the policies of nation-states in order to pursue their narrow corporate interests. Some states have made efforts, in varying degrees, against the undesirable effects of globalization. The adverse social and economic impacts of globalization push people's movements, both in the North and the South, to resist and struggle for positive social, political and economic changes over a broad range of regions and issues. Globalization is not a unilinear, monolithic process but a multifaceted and highly contradictory one. Globalization in general and neoliberal globalization in particular have had a very deep impact on the fabric of social relations. Globalization affects labor markets and labor relations, migration, the use and control of resources, human rights, democracy, cultures and traditions and gender relations; and has a tendency to increase ethnic and racial conflicts in ways which have sometimes led to civil wars. Despite the adverse impacts of globalization, however, peoples of both the North and the South have managed to create space for struggle over the social, economic, political and cultural issues impinging on their lives. People's organizations and NGOs should contribute to widening these spaces for struggle and resistance, and for seeking new alternatives. On October 7-10, more than 60 representatives of NGOs, advocates and groups from Asia and Europe met in Hong Kong to jointly discuss the phenomenon of globalization. Our objectives were to deepen our understanding of globalization and its impact on people, discuss ways of challenging and resisting globalization, explore alternatives, and forge stronger partnerships. The conference deliberated on the following issues: LABOR The conference noted the following trends in the labor market: fragmentation of work and the workforce at the national and international levels; widespread informalization; intensification of labor migration; feminization of labor; and massive retrenchments and layoffs aggravating the crisis of employment associated with the pattern of jobless growth. There has been a consequent radical erosion of labor rights, making it more difficult for workers to represent their interests in the company and political levels, and reducing the strength of traditional unions. Thus there is a need for new ways of organizing and representing labor interests. With regard to the formal sector, the conference recognizes the importance of universally observing core labor standards. It welcomes the various relevant international agreements but demands more effective mechanisms for implementing them. With regard to the informal sector, there is a need to develop strong organizations for the protection and empowerment of workers and to adopt minimum "safety nets." The conference takes note of the positive impact, limited though it may be, of such initiatives to minimize labor exploitation as pressuring transnational companies to observe codes of conduct and pressuring governments to adopt and implement core labor rights and international standards, including for migrants, informal sector workers and the unemployed. The linkage between labor standards and trade/investment regimes as a way of protecting workers remains a contentious issue even among civil society groups. Advocates of this idea are calling for the rethinking of the linkage to take WTO and other international bodies into consideration. The conference participants are united on the need to address economic and social issues as an indivisible whole. We see the need for increased solidarity, defined in part as working against the further fragmentation of the global workforce and the unemployed. One possible avenue for solidarity action is pressure for the enforcement of core labor rights and standards. RURAL ECONOMIES Neoliberal globalization has everywhere marginalized the peasant sector. This marginalization has been intensified by the agribusiness TNCs' domination of world agriculture facilitated by the "Green Revolution"; by the unequal liberalization of agricultural trade, including especially European Union and United States subsidy policies; by corporate monopoly of biotechnology; and by the withdrawal of government supports for agriculture and bias towards the industrial sector. Moreover, this marginalization is aided by governments' lack of political will to carry out genuine agrarian reform. The overall effects of these processes are the following: landlessness and joblessness; unviability of farms; poverty, indebtedness and destitution of peasants; loss or erosion of land rights, loss of on-farm decision-making; overexploitation of natural resources; depletion of genetic resources; water scarcity; and soil erosion. The breakdown of rural economies, with its attendant massive rural unemployment, has also led to migration and the displacement of communities; beyond the peasant sectors, it has led to the loss of food security at a global level. Other critical issues posed by globalization to the rural sector include the monopoly of food production by the North, which contributes to undermining food security; the effects of IMF structural adjustment programs (SAPs); the withdrawal of necessary government supports in the South; and a broad range of issues confronting indigenous peoples. HUMAN RIGHTS Globalization creates pressures not only for economic but also for political issues, which are increasingly interconnected. While political accountability becomes ever more essential in response to the pressures of globalization it also becomes harder to achieve because of these same pressures. One crucial focus in the struggle over globalization should be the pressure for democratization on all levels and in all spheres of politics. This includes both democratization at the national levels and the democratic restructuring of international organizations, particularly the World Bank, International Monetary Fund and World Trade Organization. The recognition of human rights is an essential element of democratization. The conference stressed the need for the implementation and adoption of existing human rights instruments. The basic values contained in the human rights instruments have to orient the political sphere at the national level; each state has the responsibility to fulfill the basic needs of the people. But these values also have to guide the principles of politics within the international organizations. Civil society has a crucial role to play in confronting official decision-making bodies at all levels, in forcing them to live up to their responsibilities. The central element of democratization is the strengthening of civil society as a countervailing power to the economically and politically dominant forces. Our understanding of civil society is emancipatory. The politics of Western countries are highly contradictory when it comes to human rights. On the one hand they push for the recognition especially of political rights, while on the other they pursue policies which not only impede the realization of economic, social, and cultural rights (e.g., SAPs) but also endanger the exercise of political rights. This is becoming perfectly clear in the present economic crisis. The realization of social, economic and cultural rights has to proceed from the understanding that these constitute a right to life. As a step in this direction there is a need for systematic collation of data on the impact of the economic crisis on such most vulnerable and affected sectors as women and children; migrants; refugees; victims of violence; peasants; and the unemployed, both in the South and the North. The commonality of these problems calls for solidarity across national and North/South dividing lines and for more creative and effective ways of working towards the enforcement of human rights. Foreign debt has caused the impoverishment of peoples by depriving them of their dignity and their right to survive. Debt cancellation for the poor countries before the year 2000 is crucial to claiming people's basic rights. As substantive democracy is threatened everywhere in the world, there is a need for deeper consultation on democracy among the participants of this conference and for further North-South dialogues. Thus the task for human rights is to improve the quality of and defend the right to life. The right to life is the source of all other rights, yet it is threatened everywhere by poverty and violence. North-South dialogue must concentrate on the defense of the right to life, economically as well as politically. The easy tolerance of death and destruction need to be exposed as negations of the right to life. Democratization both in the West and the East must be founded on the premise of defending the right to life. The conference stressed the need for the implementation of human rights instruments. GENDER Patriarchy has permeated all aspects of the lives of women and gender discrimination has intensified in the age of globalization, as women have become increasingly absorbed into worldwide economic processes. While these processes may sometimes have opened up new economic possibilities for women they have also almost invariably lead to new and serious problems. These include such gender-specific forms of exploitation as trafficking in women; forced prostitution; feminization of labor; feminization of cheap labor; feminization of poverty; and feminization of migration. Women have suffered some of the worst effects of globalization. These include the deterioration of public services as a result of privatization; other measures of structural adjustment (subsidy cuts); the transformation of the farming sector, including its ecological consequences; and the breakup of families under the economic and cultural pressures emanating from globalization. Work in the home and other forms of domestic labor continue to be economically and socially undervalued. Globalization and patriarchal culture entrench women in specific roles (domestic workers, plantation workers, entertainment workers, etc.) while treating their bodies as commodities. There is a need to strengthen the discussion of gender issues in political communication dialogue and action. There is also a need to integrate gender perspective in challenging globalization, patriarchy and other oppressive systems as well as in building alternatives to them. Such an integration would also reflect the increasing role women play in the present economic and social struggles throughout the world. CULTURE AND IDENTITY The impact of globalization on cultures is complex and ambiguous. While on the one hand globalization has opened up new possibilities and opportunities (worldwide communication, exchanges among people, etc.), on the other hand it has created a lot of pressure on various cultures, including trends towards the homogenization of lifestyles as in consumption patterns; consumerist values; communication patterns; styles of urbanization; and the loss of some cultural systems. Homogenization does not exclude domination by centralized culture and the possibilities for abuse and manipulation of cultural identities for political purposes. Indeed, such manipulation seems to be increasing. The issue of identity has to be considered fundamentally and in relation to our own work and environments. The negative effects of identity politics (pitting one social group against the other) can operate even within and among NGOs and people's organizations. Very often we are caught in the trap of dualistic discourse, structured by the distinction between 'them' and 'us,' between 'dominant' and 'dependent' cultures. There is a need to look for mutual respect and recognition and also towards open communication and creative interaction between cultures, recognizing that cultures are not static but have their own dynamics of change. Such communication and creative interaction do not imply glossing over conflicts of interest but could make it possible to spell them out more clearly. We recognize that culture and communication are affected by the constellations of political and economic power in which they take place. We commend the struggles of indigenous peoples to maintain their cultural self-expression and integrity in the face of colonialism and neoliberal globalization. CONCLUSION Despite the often reiterated claims of its proponents, neoliberal globalization will not solve the problems of inequality. Nor will it feed, clothe, educate, and empower the majority of the world's people. On the contrary it has been a major factor in rendering increasing numbers of the world's people hungry, homeless, destitute, illiterate and powerless in all areas of their lives. What will empower people is their resistance to these processes and their participation in building viable political and economic alternatives. The conference takes note of the need to develop new development paradigms, ones challenging the dominant neoliberal thinking which relies solely on market forces. The conference also sees the urgency of peoples' movements and NGOs pressuring both national governments and international institutions for reforms focussed on people's welfare and basic needs rather than on policies favoring international capital. Even as North-South issues have been sharpened, there is increasing need for those in both the North and South who suffer the consequences of globalization to act in solidarity with each other. Within this solidarity, first and foremost, the issues of those who are 'losers' in the process of globalization must be raised. But this by itself is not sufficient. The issues do not only concern 'losers' and 'winners' but are in the final analysis issues of unjust structures that demand alternatives to neoliberal 'business as usual' posturing. While solidarity incorporates the willingness for each to listen to the other and to respect the other's views it must be understood first and foremost as a question of justice and, with justice, of humanity. The conference agrees on the necessity to develop varied and creative forms of alliance and strategy in the aid of genuine solidarity. For the grassroots who are everyday resisting and fighting battles for survival, the urgent task remains: to organize, organize, organize. But in organizing, we have to build new forms of organizations, patterns of relationships that are more equitable and just, that integrate popular participation, and that generate new cultures that go against the logic of neoliberal control and manipulation and that generate fresh approaches to the question of alternatives. New, creative, and effective strategies for resistance need to be continuously evolved. Cross-border solidarity and people-to-people alliances are most urgently needed. Such alliances are strengthened by the realization and growing consciousness that issues across borders may not necessarily be the same but they are often interconnected. We need to continue to strengthen international solidarity, including campaigns and joint action-alert mechanisms. We need, however, to radicalize the notion of alliance building so that it is not only limited to 'political projects' but become the basis for cross-cultural dialogues and inter-paradigmatic exchanges, thereby enriching not only the struggle for resistance but also the common search for viable alternatives. We, the conference participants, express our appreciation to the convenors for this opportunity to explore and practice new and continuing forms of solidarity based on justice. We fully commit ourselves to work for this, through organization and action, from North to South, from South to North, from South to South and from North to North. 10 October 1998 Participants: Asian Migrant Centre 4 Jordan Road, Kowloon, Hong Kong Tel: (852) 2312-0031 Fax: (852) 2992-0111 E-mail: amc@hk.super.net Web: www.hk.super.net/~amc Asian Migrant Centre 4 Jordan Road, Kowloon, Hong Kong Tel: (852) 2312-0031 Fax: (852) 2992-0111 E-mail: amc@hk.super.net Web: www.hk.super.net/~amc From gattwd at corso.ch.planet.gen.nz Thu Nov 19 16:38:28 1998 From: gattwd at corso.ch.planet.gen.nz (Gatt Watchdog) Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1998 19:38:28 +1200 Subject: [asia-apec 896] GATT Watchdog Media Release: APEC 98 Message-ID: MEDIA RELEASE FOR IMMEDIATE USE 19/11/98 Silly Shirts and Sideshows Won't Disguise APEC's Inhuman Face Al Gore's comments about democracy in Malaysia at APEC have little to do with human rights, says GATT Watchdog. The media furore over his and Jenny Shipley's utterances is a convenient distraction away from the fact that APEC is in serious trouble, says the fair trade coalition. "Gore's comments are all about US displeasure at Mahathir's calls for regulation of the financial markets and Malaysia's continued refusal to throw itself headlong into opening up its economy. Just as US support for Suharto was withdrawn earlier this year after he had defied IMF prescriptions for the Indonesian economy in the wake of the economic crisis, so too are Gore's comments precipitated by US economic interests, not by genuine concern for the rights of Malaysian people. To hold him up as some kind of human rights advocate is totally missing the point. The Americans, as always, are interested in protecting their interests and bolstering their economic power in the region," says Aziz Choudry, of GATT Watchdog. Aziz Choudry returned on Tuesday from the International Conference on Alternatives to Globalisation in Tagaytay City, the Philippines, and the Asia Pacific Peoples Assembly, an alternative summit held parallel to the APEC Summit organised by peoples organisations, unions and non-government organisations in Kuala Lumpur. "Because APEC claims to be a community of economies - not governments or countries - it excludes from consideration any 'non-economic' social or political issues like human rights, poverty, employment or the environment unless they are redefined in 'trade-related' terms," he says. "Human rights will never be on the APEC agenda. Free trade and investment is all about removing barriers to the exploitation of people and resources. It is about the deregulation of labour markets, less onerous health and safety requirements, erosion or elimination of minimum wages and conditions, lack of job security, and reduction of the social wage. The APEC model of development tramples on human rights daily as it tries - with increasing difficulty these days, it seems - to make member economies compete in a race to the bottom to attract investment and lock in a free trade regime." "All the silly shirts in the world, and sweeping feelgood statements cannot hide the fact that the APEC vision for the region is bankrupt - economically, morally, socially, environmentally and politically. Moreover, despite the equally silly pronouncements of New Zealand government ministers and officials that the Kuala Lumpur Summit has seen "remarkable" achievements, the finest seamstress in the world cannot patch up the gaping holes that have appeared in APEC member countries commitments to further trade and investment liberalisation." "Any model of development which seeks to insulate itself from the impact of the package of reforms it promotes is unacceptable and dangerous. It is hardly surprising that APEC Leaders have just concluded their meetings in an embarrassment-free fantasyland, miles away from Kuala Lumpur, light years away from the real world. The APEC vision is crafted in a brave new world in which people are mere "human resources". It is this poisoned worldview, and this fragile-looking forum, which the New Zealand Government will be trying to sell to the public over the next few months. Any way we look at it, APEC 1999 is just not worth it!" said Mr Choudry. For further comment, contact Aziz Choudry, GATT Watchdog ph (03) 3662803 From gattwd at corso.ch.planet.gen.nz Fri Nov 20 08:49:02 1998 From: gattwd at corso.ch.planet.gen.nz (Gatt Watchdog) Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1998 11:49:02 +1200 Subject: [asia-apec 897] Naomi Klein on APEC 98 Message-ID: November 19, 1998 Toronto Star Chretien dons the crusader's cape, for now At this week's Asia [By Naomi Klein] Pacific Economic Co-operation summit, Jean Chretien is busily transforming himself from the traveling salesman we have all come to know into a principled crusader for human rights. Is it possible that Chretien has finally learned his lesson? Maybe. Or maybe he is still shilling the same half-empty package, only this time spruced up with a new high-minded pitch. Don't get me wrong: I think it's wonderful that our government is speaking out against Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad's outrageous imprisonment of his former deputy, Anwar Ibrahim. That said, the practice of imprisoning or exiling political opponents on trumped up charges is par for the course in the APEC crowd and Canada never seemed to mind before. ------------------------ Flaws like corruption are politely overlooked ------------------------ Chretien's commitment to human rights was nowhere to be found when - to name but one example - former Indonesian President Suharto engineered the ouster of his major political opponent, Megawati Sukarnoputri, before she had a chance to beat him in the 1997 elections. It's possible that Chretien's defense of Anwar proves he is turning over a new leaf after last year's APEC debacle. It is also possible, however, that Canada's inconsistent response to political ousters has less to do with democratic principles than with which politicians are doing the ousting. Suharto, for all of the blood on his hands, was always a committed free trader. Mahathir, on the other hand, has become the thorn in the side of the Asia Pacific liberalization master plan. In the era of APEC-means-business, all politicians are measured by their willingness to embrace free trade. If they are willing, little flaws like corruption are politely overlooked until well after the revolutionaries have lit the match in the presidential palace. However, if the politicians are unwilling to embrace the agenda, all tools available - including phony concern for human rights - are marshaled to marginalize them. It must be said that Mahathir is no hero. He is afraid of his own people's freedom, intolerant of dissent, megalomaniacal and anti-Semitic to boot. But make no mistake: all of that has nothing to do with Chretien's grandstanding in Malaysia. Of course Anwar should be released and Canada's pressure could well prove helpful. Still, we should be realistic about why his has become a cause célèbre. Western governments have wanted Mahathir out since he started going on about how vampiric foreign currency traders like George Soros were drinking the blood of the Third World. They also didn't like it much when he suggested that the financial crisis was a conspiracy orchestrated by corporate America to send Asian companies into bankruptcy, then buy their assets at fire-sale prices. ------------------------ They have no choice but to follow IMF reforms ------------------------ What makes Mahathir so dangerous to the West is that he is insufficiently desperate. The governments of South Korea, Thailand and Indonesia have borrowed so heavily from the International Monetary Fund that they now have no choice but to follow the rigid, IMF-proscribed free-trade reforms. Malaysia, on the other hand, managed to avoid an IMF bailout, freeing Mahathir to find his own way out of his country's crisis. At first, the Malaysian Prime Minister went along with the IMF austerity plans but when he failed to see positive results elsewhere in the region, he had the gall to change course. Now he is committing the cardinal sin against capitalism: trying to spend his way out of the recession and placing new controls on foreign investors. And that's where the current trouble began. Anwar Ibrahim - who has always been something of a free trade poster boy - refused to go along with Mahathir's plan. He wanted Malaysia to swallow the IMF medicine and reform its banking system to meet foreign standards. There is no doubt that with Anwar in power instead of Mahathir, Malaysia would be back on board APEC's free-trade bandwagon - which is precisely why he attracts so much Western sympathy. In Anwar, Chretien has found the perfect post-Peppergate issue: a human rights case that is really about trade. What is happening in Kuala Lumpur this week is not a victory for the forces that protested at APEC in Vancouver last year. Rather, Chretien and his aides are co-opting the language of human rights as a mask to disguise the same goal as always: A road to global free trade, uncluttered by all obstacles and naysayers. Last year, they had to remove the human rights protesters. This year, the target is Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad. ------------------- Naomi Klein writes on Thursdays. From gattwd at corso.ch.planet.gen.nz Fri Nov 20 10:28:08 1998 From: gattwd at corso.ch.planet.gen.nz (Gatt Watchdog) Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1998 13:28:08 +1200 Subject: [asia-apec 898] Jenny Shipley speech on APEC Message-ID: Speech: PM to Malaysia-NZ Business Council Thursday, 19 November 1998, 11:11 am Press Release: New Zealand Government RT HON JENNY SHIPLEY PRIME MINISTER OF NEW ZEALAND Address to MALAYSIA NEW ZEALAND BUSINESS COUNCIL DINNER Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia It's good to be here among friends this evening after a busy day at the Leaders' meeting. We appreciate your hosting this function this evening. Malaysia and New Zealand are good friends. My time in Kuala Lumpur has made this abundantly clear. Your Council plays a valued role in promoting trade and investment between Malaysia and New Zealand. The links between our economies go back a long way and they are truly global in scope - from Antarctica, to the United Nations, from regional security and defence, to the Commonwealth and the World Trade Organisation. Just next week some Malaysian and New Zealand academics are meeting here in KL to discuss the connections between the Malay peoples and the peoples of the Pacific. This is a fascinating theme for scholars. Our friendship has endured through times of peace and of crisis. The personal ties between us give life, durability and vitality to our relations. Over the years, many thousands of Malay students have come to New Zealand to study. Today, by far the largest number of foreign students in New Zealand are from Malaysia. I have a large university in my own electorate, at Lincoln, which welcomes many overseas students each year, including those from Malaysia. It is wonderful to see a number of Lincoln alumni here this evening. Your presence is very special. Malaysian students in New Zealand have a well-earned reputation for hard work, assiduous study, and an ability to enjoy life as well. The legacy of these direct contacts is a series of friendships, networks, experiences and impressions that are a bedrock for the relationship between our countries. Our relations are also underpinned by solid economic links. Malaysia is New Zealand's largest export market in ASEAN and our 11th largest in global terms. Two-way trade has reached almost $NZ900 million in the year to June, with the balance slightly in your favour. And this was when we were both facing tough times. I would note, in passing, that your exports to us increased last year by 27 percent - a sign that as a Council you are clearly succeeding in your work! Our open economy is a win-win solution. New Zealand consumers and manufacturers can buy at world best prices and Malaysia's exporters have the opportunity to compete in our market. In addition to two-way trade, investment in both directions has enabled you, the business community, to work together to our mutual advantage. New Zealand welcomes foreign investment. And I am assured that Malaysia does also. Burton, my husband, was impressed by his visit yesterday to a joint venture investment project in Pahang which has New Zealand, Malaysian and other external investors engaged in a major pulp and paper operation. Such partnerships between New Zealand and Malaysia involve long term commitment. I know that many Council members here tonight are equally committed in different ways to business partnerships between our economies. In manufacturing, food processing, fishing, forestry, tourism and technology, to name a few, an extensive range of two-way investments now help bind our economies together. New Zealand and Malaysia both are global trading nations. We each have a vital interest in the stability and growth of the global economy, and within it the Asia Pacific region. New Zealand did not expect, when we accepted the Chair of APEC for 1999, that the coming year would be one of economic downturn. APEC, after all, grew out of a period of rapid growth and sustained optimism. But we should not forget that the swings of economic cycles are nothing new. I was interested to read comments by Dr Mahathir that "Lagging international demand and weak commodity prices will affect our export earnings considerably. The period will be most challenging." Prime Minister Mahathir, ladies and gentlemen, was writing in the foreword to the Fifth Malaysia Plan, in March 1986. We have all faced difficult times before, and no doubt we shall do so again in the future. But it was entirely right that this year's Leaders' meeting of APEC focused squarely on the downturn that started in Asia last year, and has since spread to affect the global economy. We agreed on steps to set a course out of the turmoil. Malaysia, as Chair, deserves credit for steering our discussions in sensible directions. To my mind this year's APEC Leaders' meeting has seen the organisation come of age. Up until now it has been easy-going. The vision of Bogor, of an Asia Pacific region bound together by free trade and investment and cooperation, was forged in optimism and shaped by expectations of continued growth. It would have been easy at this Leader's meeting to have stepped backwards, and to have retreated into protectionism. We did not step backwards. Under Malaysia's Chair we instead took a further step towards achieving the goals of APEC. The outcomes achieved on trade liberalisation were not easy. Nor are they perfect. But Governments chose not to let perfection stand in the way of progress. The pace of trade liberalisation will be accelerated through the early voluntary sectoral liberalisation programme. We are going to cut the costs of business, increase export returns, and give greater choice to consumers. Most APEC economies agreed on the immediate commencement of reduction of tariffs across nine important sectors of economic activity. All APEC economies have undertaken to take the EVSL package into the World Trade Organisation and thereby seek to broaden coverage to include the balance of the WTO membership. Asia Pacific economies, representing over half of world trade, have signalled their commitment to reducing and removing import tariffs across billions of dollars of trade. If that's not progress then I'm not sure what is. APEC has shown its ability, in difficult times, to forge a liberalisation package that is all the more credible because of the difficulty we had in reaching it. Helpful as the trade outcome was, the key focus of this year's meeting was undoubtedly on the current economic downturn. Here again, APEC's worth was tested and here again, to my mind, was strengthened. Our focus was not to dwell, with nostalgia or dismay, on why our decades of growth have suddenly stopped. We know the underlying reasons for the economic shocks and loss of confidence. We know that the causes lie both in the architecture of the international financial system and the character of domestic economic plans and institutions. In Kuala Lumpur this week our focus has been, as it should be, on remedies rather than rhetoric. We agreed that the major challenge is to find policies that will support early recovery and sustainable growth in the region. APEC has a major role to play in this area. Through APEC, we can explore ideas on what policies have worked, and have not worked, in pursuing growth and confidence, and learn some lessons on what policies may reduce vulnerability to capital and exchange rate shocks. No one has a monopoly on wisdom. But we can all contribute to a "toolbox" of policy ideas that can help others in building strong transparent domestic financial systems that inspire investor confidence. And we can contribute to reviewing the architecture of the international financial system where this is warranted. To my mind, we do not need to rebuild the Bretton Woods system. But there is a case for closer surveillance of the nature of capital flows so that we can understand them better, harness the gains, and manage the risks inherent in a globalised economy. APEC Finance Ministers and Leaders have agreed to do just that. We will not be rebuilding the structures of Bretton Woods. But we will have a better wiring diagram to help avoid and manage shocks in the future. Trade and investment facilitation received a strong boost from Kuala Lumpur. This is all about cutting through the red tape and reducing the costs of trade between our economies. For every dollar added to the region's economy through APEC's liberalisation plans, a further two dollars will come from reductions in business costs through achieving APEC's facilitation objectives. This year useful progress has been made towards reforming customs procedures, increasing mutual recognition of standards and simplifying travel by business people. Such work is of particular benefit to small and medium enterprises which provide the bulk of the jobs in our economies. Dialogue with business will be a key theme of New Zealand's chairing of APEC in 1999. A number of business events are in prospect. These include business sessions around the Small and Medium Enterprises Ministerial Meeting in April; a Women's Leaders' Network Meeting and a Business Symposium in June, and a private sector CEO Summit in Auckland in September at the time of the APEC Leaders' Meeting. We'll also be pleased to engage you in new trade and investment opportunities in New Zealand. We hope, at the same time, you can catch the excitement of our defence of the America's Cup in yachting, and preparations for the new Millennium. I hope many of you will take the opportunity to visit us. We want to see next year: - further substantive progress towards trade and investment liberalisation and facilitation; - a credible APEC response to the economic crisis; - reinforcement of the capacity of institutions and human resources in the region to deal with the economic challenges we all face, and - the building of broader support for APEC among the wider communities of which we are part. I look forward to working with you as we undertake these tasks, successfully, in the coming year. I also look forward to welcoming you to our country, where the New Zealand people are keen to share with you our enthusiasm about the future and where you will have the opportunity to discover New Zealand for yourselves. From gattwd at corso.ch.planet.gen.nz Fri Nov 20 10:33:31 1998 From: gattwd at corso.ch.planet.gen.nz (Gatt Watchdog) Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1998 13:33:31 +1200 Subject: [asia-apec 899] NZ Trade Minister on NZ-Thai Relations Message-ID: Speech: New Zealand & Thailand: APEC Partners Wednesday, 18 November 1998, 1:54 pm Press Release: New Zealand Government An Address By The Trade Minister of New Zealand Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith New Zealand & Thailand: APEC Partners Breakfast Meeting Thai/New Zealand Chamber of Commerce Bangkok Thailand 7.30 am Wednesday 18 November 1998 (Thailand Time) 1.30 pm Wednesday 18 November 1998 (New Zealand Time) The Thai/New Zealand Chamber of Commerce is the organisation behind the substance of the relationship between our two APEC economies. I'm pleased it has proven possible for me to meet with you here in Bangkok this morning. Thailand is an important market for New Zealand - our 17th largest in global terms. We're also an economy that is open to Thailand, as we are to all trading partners. While the Asian Economic Crisis has meant our exports to Thailand have declined, your exports to New Zealand have increased by a third. We're perfectly happy to see your exports to New Zealand continue to grow, taking advantage of the lower baht, because it shows you can produce goods that New Zealanders value, at the right price. We're a fully open economy, because we believe New Zealanders benefit from that. Of course, we would like our exports to Thailand to fully recover too - and grow. We are already seeing a strengthening of education linkages, with our universities and polytechnics developing linkages with their counterparts throughout ASEAN. New visa regulations for foreign students will make it easier for Thai students to study in New Zealand. As a former Minister of Education, I can assure you that our schools, universities and polytechnics are world class. There are other areas where we see particular potential, such as food processing, forestry, pulp and paper, environmental engineering and telecommunications. In all these areas, and others, New Zealand offers the finest expertise and knowledge in the world. We look forward to working with Thailand. The speed with which those linkages grow will depend on the speed with which Thailand and the region recovers from the current difficulties. With the Asian Economic Crisis, the people of New Zealand have a great deal of sympathy with the people of Thailand and elsewhere in the region. The contagion effects of the crisis mean that we have experienced a small recession in the first two quarters of this year, which has caused some hardship. We know the effects have been far, far worse here. We have provided some assistance with public sector reform. But we also admire how Thailand is courageously tackling the crisis, while also maintaining your commitment to further opening markets. We look forward to being able to make progress on access issues of particular interest to New Zealand, such as kiwifruit, skim milk powder and cheese. New Zealand holds the view strongly that trade benefits people, and the more trade the better. In the last decade, countries which have had open economies have achieved double the annual growth rates of others. The world has moved towards more and more trade. Since 1950, world trade volumes have increased by 16 times, while production has increased by only six times. Just between 1994 and 1997, trade volumes grew by an average of 9% a year. Here in the Asia Pacific we experienced a quarter century which has generally been peaceful. It's led to huge growth in regional consultation, cooperation and trade. It has meant that more people have risen out of poverty in a shorter period and on a greater scale than at any other place or time in human history. We in New Zealand believe strongly that should and must continue. It is why we are such strong proponents of further liberalisation. We believe it is a vital component to achieve recovery from the current crisis. We're pleased that Thailand remains committed to reform. We're pleased that, in general, all Asia Pacific economies are committed to reform. Over the weekend in Kuala Lumpur, APEC Trade Ministers from sixteen economies reached agreement on early voluntary liberalisation of trade in nine sectors. The sixteen economies include Thailand and New Zealand, and also the world's two biggest economies, the US and Japan. Among the nine sectors are two of vital importance to New Zealand, fish and forest products. The other seven sectors are chemicals, energy, environmental goods and services, gems and jewellery, medical equipment, toys and a telecommunications mutual recognition agreement. It was a balanced package designed to provide immediate benefits to each APEC economy. In each of the sectors, tariff end-rates and end-dates were specified for every product line by Trade Ministers earlier this year. What was agreed was that APEC economies may immediately implement the tariff components of a voluntary basis. There will be implementation of facilitation, ECOTECH and other initiatives in all nine sectors. Even more significantly, it was agreed that a WTO process will be initiated immediately on the basis of the framework established in Kuching. All participating economies - including the economic superpowers, the US and Japan - have agreed to work constructively to conclude the agreement in all nine sectors in 1999 at the WTO. It means that we now have agreement at APEC to achieve rules-based liberalisation in those nine sectors next year. It means that WTO members that are not members of APEC will have the option of joining up. I am confident that positive statement of support for trade liberalisation in the region will contribute to restoring business confidence. Economies such as Thailand - and also Indonesia, Korea and Malaysia - facing tremendous difficulties, deserve commendation for their courage and commitment in signing up. Obviously, I believe the deal will help create growth and jobs in New Zealand's fisheries and forestry sectors. It will mean we will have much better access to some of our most important markets for some of our most important products. But, just as importantly to New Zealand and the region, I believe it will be good for all participating economies. It will help to get growth back into the region. I don't base that opinion on theory. I base it on New Zealand's experience over the last 14 years. I don't want to suggest that what New Zealand has done can be dire ctly translated to any other economy, including Thailand. Thailand's des tiny is for Thailand to choose. But I do believe an understanding of New Zealand's experience could be useful as a case study as you plan the next phase of your economic comeback. Back in 1984, New Zealand's economy was a basket-case. We subsid ised our main industry of agriculture. We had strict capital controls. We protected our manufacturing sector, with import controls. Un ions dominated our labour market. Big, incompetent Government dominated the economy. We had extraordinarily high levels of direct taxation, wi th a top rate of 66%. Despite that, we had budget deficits of up to 8 % of GDP. Inflation was controlled only because the Government made p rice and wage increases illegal. None of this was sustainable. Our li ving standards were plunging down the OECD league tables. In 1984, an incoming Labour Government began the process of turning that around. In 1990, the incoming National Government - of which I w as a part - continued with the programme and refined it. Combined, our two main political parties have contributed to turning New Zealand aroun d. We abolished all our agricultural subsidies in one year. We free floated our dollar. We lifted almost all our import controls. We now have a flexible labour market, based on cooperation between emplo yers and employees under simple contract law. State assets were privati sed, including our airline and our rail and telecommunications industr ies. We controlled Government spending, cut taxes, and our debt has fa llen from over half of GDP to around a quarter. We have no net for eign public debt. Inflation in our economy is controlled by the Governo r of our independent Reserve Bank being fired if it goes above 3%. The transition was not easy. When we abolished agriculture subsid ies, around 1% of our farmers had to stop farming. Unemployment rose f or a time, as inefficient, import substitution industries found they coul dn't compete. But the returns have come. Around a quarter of a million new jobs have been created this decade in an economy with a populatio n of fewer than 4 million. Our living standards have risen with take home pay packets in our economy increasing faster than prices. We're now able to compete with the rest of the world and succeed. What's more, further liberalisation is continuing. Already, 95 % of imports enter New Zealand under a zero tariff. The tariffs on the remaining 5% are also very low. By 2006, we will have abolished all our tariffs. One hundred percent of imports from Thailand or anywhere else will be entirely tariff-free. At the same time, we are making it easier for businesspeople from overseas to obtain long-term multiple-entry business visas. We've made it easier for such people to later obtain permanent residence. And we've made it easier for overseas companies to relocate in New Zea land and bring employees with them. We encourage investment from oversea s. Domestically, we've reformed our electricity industry, and alr eady consumer prices have started to fall significantly. We're preparin g to sell our second largest electricity generator. We're seeking a sim pler system of paying for our roading network. Our key piece of environmental legislation will be reformed to speed up econ omic development, while still protecting our environment. What we are aiming to be is the most efficient and open economy in the world, because we believe that will lead to higher and higher li ving standards for New Zealanders. Each Asia Pacific economy will want to respond to the Asian Econ omic Crisis differently. What New Zealand provides is a case study of how one Asia Pacific economy responded to our economic crisis in 1984. We may provide some ideas of what to do, and what not to do - for exam ple, we got some of the phasing of our reforms wrong. Next year, New Zealand will chair APEC. It will be our biggest t rade and economic policy challenge ever. We're determined to use our yea r in the chair constructively to help the process of putting the region back on a growth path. We'll be developing initiatives around three key themes: 1. trade and investment liberalisation and facilitation 2. strengthening markets, and 3. broadening support for APEC We look forward to working with Thailand through our year in the APEC chair, to progress this vital work. And we look forward to working with you at the WTO, both on the APEC deal and on a new Round. New Zealand admires Thailand's courage at this difficult time, as you continue to reform and liberalise your economy. We have every confidence you will recover and come back stronger than before. We maintain our strong belief that the 21st Century will be the Asia Pacific Century. From panap at panap.po.my Thu Nov 19 16:42:12 1998 From: panap at panap.po.my (PAN Asia Pacific) Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1998 16:42:12 Subject: [asia-apec 900] CONFRONTING GLOBALISATION, ASSERTING OUR RIGHT TO FOOD Message-ID: <3194@panap.po.my> CONFRONTING GLOBALISATION, ASSERTING OUR RIGHT TO FOOD Statement from the Forum on Land, Food Security and Agriculture Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 11-12 November 1998 We, 130 representatives from 18 countries and 64 organizations met in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia from 11-12 November 1998 at the Forum on Land, Food Security and Sustainable Agriculture. We represent women and men farmers, fisherfolk, women, indigenous people, peoples' organizations, consumers' organizations, NGOs, academics and scientists. We assert the following: Globalization, driven by international trade mechanisms like the WTO and APEC, is destroying local food production, food security, our culture, our livelihood, local knowledge systems and biodiversity. This is endangering the lives of people, destroying the environment, land, forest and water. People are being displaced and forced to migrate. Families and communities are disintegrated. Women and men peasant farmers, workers and migrant workers are pushed into more exploitative conditions of work. Women and children are the most vulnerable and often forced into the sex trade. Reality 1. Land is the source of livelihood, survival, identity, food security and culture. Throughout Asia and South America peasants are losing access to land and globalization is intensifying this problem. Large-scale and unscrupulous land owners and big corporations are producing for export or taking land out of agriculture. This is being facilitated by governments. 2. Globalization is intensifying the practice of export-oriented industrial shrimp aquaculture and fish farming, often with foreign companies. This is destroying local and community structure and causing ecological devastation. Globalization is also promoting large scale factory fishing. Artisanal fishing communities are being threatened by the encroachment of foreign fishing vessels in territorial waters. 3. The Asian economic crisis has increased the cost of food and created shortages, and loss of jobs. People have been impoverished and cannot afford to purchase food and other essentials. The Asian crisis has revealed the vulnerability of dependence on imports to meet our food needs. The response of governments has been to further industrialize agriculture encouraging monocultures and the high use of chemical inputs at increasing costs, endangering the environment and human health. 4. To protect their own interests and the interests of the elites, governments are conceding to the dictates of the IMF especially through the bail outs at this time of the Asian crisis. The interest of the IMF is in protecting the investments of Northern financial institutions. 5. Transnational companies are driving and benefiting from globalization. They are consolidating their interests and increasing their control over agriculture and fisheries. They are using government structures and international and national development agencies to promote their aims and their products. They are becoming more aggressive and sophisticated in promoting their green image. They are promoting food production, rather than access, as the solution to food security and hunger. 6. Women are predominantly responsible for the provisions of the food needs of their families. Despite their multiple and vital roles as farmers, fishers, farmworkers and caretakers and managers of their households. Women often experience discrimination in terms of access and control over land and water resources. The Asian crisis has intensified this gender-based discrimination and the exploitation and violence against women, both within the family and in the workplace. 7. Globalization is intensifying militarization and state repression, especially in the rural areas. 8. Narrow, nationalistic and chauvinistic forces are reacting against globalization leading to intensification and fundamentalism and other forms of intolerance which are unleashing caste and racial violence. Struggles and emerging issues 9. We denounce globalization, and the institutions and governments which promote liberalization, deregulation and privatization. We are part of growing movements to resist and initiate concrete alternatives for securing our food. Actions include taking over and occupying land, ecological and sustainable farming and taking mass action. Grass roots campaigns are happening at different levels. Mobilizing, organizing, awareness building, advocacy, publicity, training, sharing information and demonstrating are actions we are taking to push for change. 10. We are strengthening and building mass-based movements and organizations to resist globalization and to struggle for rights, such as the right to land, the right to safe and secure food, access to natural resources, ancestral domains, knowledge and to participation in decision making. 11. We are already demonstrating there are sustainable alternatives. Peoples movements have used the technology of sustainable agriculture to build resistance and political action. 12. We pledge solidarity with all peoples' movements struggling for these rights. Strategy and action 13. We resist the imposition of the WTO regime and work towards its dismantling. We demand the removal of the Agreement on Agriculture and will work towards achieving this in 1999-2000. 14. We call for the dismantling of APEC. WE DEMAND: 15. That governments develop people centred, pro-poor development plan through participatory processes, and that they: - stop intrusive and exploitative trade liberalization policies that destroy local communities; - ensure food security and sustainable agriculture; - promote the rights of artisanal and traditional fishing communities; - protect the rights, health and well being of agricultural, plantation and industrial workers; - abolish the Agreement on Agriculture, Sanitary and Phytosanitary Standard, TRIPS from the WTO; - establish an international agreement to prohibit food export dumping; - develop an alternative trading system that is fair, democratic and transparent and in protective of the needs and requirements of developing and least-develop economies, and focus on people-to-people exchanges. 16. Land for landless women and men peasants who work the land, with sufficient support for sustainable rural livelihoods and economies as a foundation for people-centred development and self reliance; and the restitution of equivalent productive land to those who have been dispossessed. 17. Removal of discriminative legislation, policies, or customary practices that deny women the right to access to resources and sustain their livelihoods. 18. A stop to self-destructive agriculture and fishing methods and ending conversion of agricultural lands and coastal areas into non-productive land. 19. A ban on the release of genetically engineered organisms and the importation of genetically engineered foods and seeds into our farms and markets. PLAN OF ACTION 20. Make a collective effect to publicize the negative impacts of the Agreement on Agriculture (which includes fisheries) on food security in different countries and on the lives of affected people. In doing this we will link regionally and internationally. 21. Study and promote alternative fair and equitable trade. 22. Document concrete local impacts of globalization in different countries. This includes the impact on: - land and water utilization and appropriation - food security at national, local and household levels - survival mechanisms of the vulnerable and marginalized people - government policies that are diluting health and environmental safety and related issues - health and the environment problems (e.g. of pesticides) and present our own evidence - indigenous and local agricultural practices of various forms of intellectual property rights 23. Launch international campaigns. Support action days, particularly: a "Day of No Pesticide Use" on 3 December in memory of the Bhopal tragedy; an International Day of Fisherfolk on 21 November; an International Day of Resistance to the WTO on 15 December. 24. Undertake dialogue with communities and exchange visits to learn from each other. 25. Provide research and information for formal and non-formal education, and public awareness. 26. Make sure that our governments are aware of our demands; demonstrate to them that alternatives can work; and fight for their acceptance and implementation. 27. Promote more ecological agriculture and sustainable consumption patterns in all countries, North and South, with opportunities for small scale production and sustainable rural livelihoods. 28. Support and develop campaigns against transnational corporations. Actions include research the companies, monitor their practices, expose them and demand accountability and ethical practices. 29. Create alternatives to transnational power at community level. These include: - Organizing at local level; - Undertaking specific actions like monitoring health effects of pesticides and baby food companies; developing pesticide free villages, global seed networks, community level conservation; protecting traditional plant breeding, seed banks and seed exchange mechanisms; - Studying and publicizing successful sustainable farming initiatives with details of yields and economic returns; - Promoting breast feeding as the basic food security while ensuring women's reproductive rights. 30. Pressure the UN to actively implement reporting mechanisms by governments on banned and severely restricted dangerous pesticides, pharmaceutical and chemicals, including the UN Consolidated List and the PIC Convention. We will submit relevant data directly to the UN. 31. Strengthen farmer/fisher-consumer links and encourage consumers to eat locally grown, sustainably-produced foods. 32. Campaign for protection of local and indigenous knowledge and genetic resources from intellectual property rights regimes, and an immediate withdrawal of existing patents on biological and genetic resources and indigenous knowledge. 33. Recognize that true science and truly sustainable economics lies with women and men farmers, fisher-folk and indigenous peoples. 34. We will use and build on existing strategies, including civil disobedience, to resist globalization and to assert our rights. We will support each other in the resistance against the oppression of globalization. ****************************************************************** p/s: Please refer to http://www.poptel.org.uk/panap for more information on PAN-AP and this forum From g2jomo at umcsd.um.edu.my Fri Nov 20 10:04:47 1998 From: g2jomo at umcsd.um.edu.my (Jomo) Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1998 09:04:47 +0800 Subject: [asia-apec 901] Re: Naomi Klein on APEC 98 References: Message-ID: <3654C02F.AF9BC85C@umcsd.um.edu.my> Many Malaysians opposed to the Mahathir regime resent your easy claims that Anwar was a 'free trade poster boy'. Admittedly, he was more 'neo-liberal' in his rhetoric compared to Mahathir, who has been tough in his rhetoric, but often compliant otherwise. As Mahathir himself has noted, their differences were not primarily over economic policy, etc. It is a straightforward power struggle precipitated by Soeharto's fall and some Anwarists hoping that Mahathir would go after a nudge; Anwar and the rest of his camp were in two minds about this, but the attempted nudge gave Anwar's enemies the chance to win over Mahathir to move decisively against Anwar. Gatt Watchdog wrote: > November 19, 1998 Toronto Star > > Chretien dons the crusader's cape, for now > > At this week's Asia [By Naomi Klein] > Pacific Economic > Co-operation summit, Jean Chretien is > busily transforming himself from the > traveling salesman we have all come to > know into a principled crusader for human > rights. > > Is it possible that Chretien has finally > > learned his lesson? Maybe. Or maybe he is > still shilling the same half-empty > package, only this time spruced up with a > new high-minded pitch. > > Don't get me wrong: I think it's wonderful > that our government is speaking out > against Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir > Mohamad's outrageous imprisonment of his > former deputy, Anwar Ibrahim. That said, > the practice of imprisoning or exiling > political opponents on trumped up charges > is par for the course in the APEC crowd > and Canada never seemed to mind before. > > ------------------------ > Flaws like corruption > are politely overlooked > ------------------------ > > Chretien's commitment to human rights was > nowhere to be found when - to name but one > example - former Indonesian President > Suharto engineered the ouster of his major > political opponent, Megawati Sukarnoputri, > before she had a chance to beat him in the > 1997 elections. > > It's possible that Chretien's defense of > Anwar proves he is turning over a new leaf > after last year's APEC debacle. > > It is also possible, however, that > Canada's inconsistent response to > political ousters has less to do with > democratic principles than with which > politicians are doing the ousting. > Suharto, for all of the blood on his > hands, was always a committed free trader. > Mahathir, on the other hand, has become > the thorn in the side of the Asia Pacific > liberalization master plan. > > In the era of APEC-means-business, all > politicians are measured by their > willingness to embrace free trade. If they > are willing, little flaws like corruption > are politely overlooked until well after > the revolutionaries have lit the match in > the presidential palace. However, if the > politicians are unwilling to embrace the > agenda, all tools available - including > phony concern for human rights - are > marshaled to marginalize them. > > It must be said that Mahathir is no hero. > He is afraid of his own people's freedom, > intolerant of dissent, megalomaniacal and > anti-Semitic to boot. But make no mistake: > all of that has nothing to do with > Chretien's grandstanding in Malaysia. > > Of course Anwar should be released and > Canada's pressure could well prove > helpful. Still, we should be realistic > about why his has become a cause cilhbre. > > Western governments have wanted Mahathir > out since he started going on about how > vampiric foreign currency traders like > George Soros were drinking the blood of > the Third World. > > They also didn't like it much when he > suggested that the financial crisis was a > conspiracy orchestrated by corporate > America to send Asian companies into > bankruptcy, then buy their assets at > fire-sale prices. > > ------------------------ > They have no choice but > to follow IMF reforms > ------------------------ > > What makes Mahathir so dangerous to the > West is that he is insufficiently > desperate. > > The governments of South Korea, Thailand > and Indonesia have borrowed so heavily > from the International Monetary Fund that > they now have no choice but to follow the > rigid, IMF-proscribed free-trade reforms. > > Malaysia, on the other hand, managed to > avoid an IMF bailout, freeing Mahathir to > find his own way out of his country's > crisis. > > At first, the Malaysian Prime Minister > went along with the IMF austerity plans > but when he failed to see positive results > elsewhere in the region, he had the gall > to change course. Now he is committing the > cardinal sin against capitalism: trying to > spend his way out of the recession and > placing new controls on foreign investors. > And that's where the current trouble > began. > > Anwar Ibrahim - who has always been > something of a free trade poster boy - > refused to go along with Mahathir's plan. > He wanted Malaysia to swallow the IMF > medicine and reform its banking system to > meet foreign standards. > > There is no doubt that with Anwar in power > instead of Mahathir, Malaysia would be > back on board APEC's free-trade bandwagon > - which is precisely why he attracts so > much Western sympathy. > > In Anwar, Chretien has found the perfect > post-Peppergate issue: a human rights case > that is really about trade. > > What is happening in Kuala Lumpur this > week is not a victory for the forces that > protested at APEC in Vancouver last year. > Rather, Chretien and his aides are > co-opting the language of human rights as > a mask to disguise the same goal as > always: A road to global free trade, > uncluttered by all obstacles and > naysayers. > > Last year, they had to remove the human > rights protesters. This year, the target > is Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir > Mohamad. > > ------------------- > > Naomi Klein writes on Thursdays. From gattwd at corso.ch.planet.gen.nz Fri Nov 20 13:05:26 1998 From: gattwd at corso.ch.planet.gen.nz (Gatt Watchdog) Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1998 16:05:26 +1200 Subject: [asia-apec 902] SprayPEC - Article Message-ID: SprayPEC 1997 - APEC's True Colours on Display by Aziz Choudry Canadians are calling it "SprayPEC". East Timorese Nobel Laureate Jose Ramos- Horta has described it as "totally abominable". Headlines have screamed: "PM dodges grilling over APEC spraying"; "Opposition parties join forces to attack PM over APEC violence; pepper-spraying of summit protesters called offensive to Canada", "RCMP [Royal Canadian Mounted Police] over-reacts to students to protect Suharto feelings", "PM's aides talked to police just before APEC incident", "Legal experts say PM may have to resign over APEC", and "RCMP spied on protesters before APEC". Its handling of security at last year's APEC Summit in Vancouver has turned into a political nightmare for Jean Chretien's government. Opposition MPs from across the political spectrum have hammered him in Parliament over the issue. Although nearly a year has passed since the event, the media has gone on a feeding frenzy. Official documents which have steadily made their way into the public domain implicate the Prime Minister's Office in a heavyhanded crackdown which resulted in dozens of arrests, scores of people peppersprayed, and a wave of public outrage over the incident. Chretien, while at times struggling uncomfortably to dodge the barrage of questions, has only made matters worse by saying that the use of pepperspray was preferable to hitting the protesters with baseball bats. The security operation for APEC was the largest in Canada's history. And it is the images of police pepperspraying and violently arresting non-violent protesters - mostly students - as well as journalists who were in a crowd of some 2000 people, outside the APEC Economic Leaders Summit last November 25th on the University of British Columbia (UBC) campus that have lingered in most people's minds much longer than memories of what the APEC meetings were actually about. As Toronto Star columnist Naomi Klein wrote, "[f]or its opponents, APEC was always about being shut up and shut out. The protesters were relegated to having to scrawl their concerns on signs from the wrong side of a security zone precisely because those concerns had no place on the side of the fence that actually mattered" ("Remember what APEC protests were all about", 17/09/98) Many Canadians were shocked and outraged by what they saw. For many of us international observers who had also been present in other cities that had hosted the annual APEC media circus, Vancouver carried on the APEC tradition of Leaders Summits serving as a potent symbol of the human rights abuses which the free market model of development promotes throughout the region. And the message about the police actions from local Indigenous Peoples who had been as marginalised in most of the "alternative" NGO meetings held at the time as they were from the official events was: "This - and worse - has been happening to us for years - and no-one has really been interested. Canada is a colonial state. Why should we expect anything different from the government and the RCMP?" Every city where APEC Leaders meetings have occurred has suffered from restrictions on the freedom of local citizens. Alternative press conferences were broken up by the military in Indonesia. Homeless people were forcibly removed from around the meeting venue and the entire Osaka CBD was shut down for days in Japan in 1995. An estimated 33,000 squatter familes in Manila were relocated and their homes destroyed to create an "eyesore-free" zone before the APEC VIPs arrived in 1996. What is clear is that the 1997 security operation was, in the words of APEC Summit organiser, Robert Vanderloo, carried out "not so much from a security point of view but to avoid embarrassment to APEC leaders." Not unlike the Ramos government in the Philippines the year before, the Canadian government pursued a dual strategy in dealing to criticism of APEC, and the human rights records of many of its members. It stepped up the rhetoric about the need to involve "civil society" and pursue environmentally sustainable goals within APEC. The federal and BC provincial governments attempted to blunt domestic opposition to APEC by funding and supporting a "People's Summit" of NGOs and unions. But what happened away from the plush venue for this meeting on the streets of Vancouver showed the true face, the true price of the neoliberal agenda. The police have tried to justify their actions by saying that they were protecting protesters from a heavily armed contingent of Indonesian security personnel, who were themselves under close watch by local security forces after they had repeatedly refused to obey security protocols set by the RCMP. And while 5 Indonesian agents were ultimately arrested, 3 of them at gunpoint, the claims made to supposedly back up the argument that the RCMP had to be "cruel to be kind" at APEC don't seem to stack up. Sure, Indonesian officials had put pressure on Canada to guarantee that it would shield Suharto from any visible protests. But Canada is after all the great "democracy" which sent more armed military personnel to besiege and intimidate a small group of Mohawk Indians and their supporters defending their sacred land near Oka, Quebec in 1990 than it sent to the Gulf War. It is the great "democracy" that cuts deals with transnational corporations to strip the resources and destroy the lives of Indigenous Peoples on lands that have never been ceded to the Canadian state. So what happened in November 1997 in Vancouver, while outrageous and abhorrent, is hardly an isolated incident in Canadian history. Some of the more critical voices against the APEC Summit, like the APEC Alert network, made up largely of students and community activists, were the target of police surveillance operations months prior to the actual Leaders Summit even though police files state "some of these individuals may engage in civil disobedience however,...none are considered violent". A number of them were arrested in the weeks leading up to the Summit for creative protests against APEC and the presence of leaders like Suharto on their campus. The day before police hosed down a crowd of protesters at UBC with fire-extinguisher sized canisters of pepperspray, plainclothes police nabbed APEC Alert spokesperson Jaggi Singh as he walked between buildings on the UBC campus during a teach-in on globalisation. It was clearly a politically motivated move to get him out of the way. Or as RCMP communications put it - "with a view to eliminating some of the high profile members of Apec Alert from the UBC area" charges should be laid against specific perceived leaders. Peaceful protesters had their signs forcibly removed. Some were arrested for holding up bits of card reading "free speech". Several complain that their conditions of release violated their rights to peaceful assembly and free speech, in that those arrested were asked to sign guarantees that they would not return to campus until APEC was over, and would not associate with other anti-APEC activists. RCMP Public Complaints Commission hearings started in September to look into the numerous complaints of police using excessive force, and the violations of protesters' civil liberties. Many pointed out that the Commission process was fundamentally flawed from the outset. It is not an independent inquiry but an internal police mechanism. Calls for a truly independent hearing have fallen on deaf ears. And in late October, after allegations that the Commission's chairman had been overheard prejudging the hearings long before they had begun, the Commission was adjourned indefinitely with lawyers for the police crying "bias". Meanwhile, a number of civil legal suits have been filed against both the Police and the Prime Minister's Office. Rather ironic then is the fact that around the time of the Vancouver Summit, both official and some avowedly anti-APEC voices talked of opportunities to export Canada's values with its goods and services, and of using Canada's reputation for "integrity and fairness" to pressure those APEC (read "Asian") economies with "poor human rights records" to change. Asian leaders, some said, just need exposure to Western style-democracy. Yet in a recent interview on CBC Radio News, Jose Ramos-Horta pointed out that Canada was giving a poor example to the world when it comes to democracy and human rights. Referring to the Malaysian police's recent use of pepperspray against demonstrators he said: "I thought, God, did they learn it from the Canadians, or what? Because the first time I heard was in connection with Vancouver." However, as APEC Alert activist Jonathan Oppenheim put it: "As in the Rodney King beating, the explicit images shown on TV are markers of an underlying problem. It's not the overt, obvious suppression that we should worry about, but the constant, grinding silencing of dissent that occurs every day. If we look through the haze of pepper spray, we will see that what counts is not the narrow legal definition of freedom of speech but freedom itself." >From Jakarta to Ottawa, from Manila to Wellington, APEC host governments have strived to showcase their countries on the international stage as prosperous market "economies", dissent-free and pursuing an economic agenda consistent with the narrow vision of private sector freemarketeers and their fellow travellers in government ministries. This job is getting harder and harder as a crisis of legitimacy overtakes the free market model and the institutions and processes which promote it. And it's getting harder as the voices raised against it are more insistent and draw on an increasingly wider section of the population. It is not even as if the Leaders Summits are where the real work of APEC takes place. That happens throughout the year, behind closed doors, in "embarrassment-free enclaves" in lower-profile gatherings of senior officials, ministers, and working groups. But the Leaders Summit is APEC's showpiece, made for the media and domestic consumption. For years many of us have said that APEC, and the other vehicles which serve the interests of global capital, can only survive if their processes and deliberations, and the assumptions on which they are based are kept in the dark. Like Dracula, once exposed to the cold light of day they struggle to survive scrutiny. The claims made by the freemarket cheerleaders about globalisation are becoming more and more fragile, especially as the global economic crisis continues to cause untold human havoc across the planet. Desperation is setting in among those who have sacrificed their souls to the altar of trade and investment liberalisation. If governments are prepared to go to such lengths to ensure that they project a sanitised image of economic success to APEC Leaders and "the markets" for a short meeting - how far will they go to attract foreign investors and create an attractive free trade and investment regime? From alarm at HK.Super.NET Sat Nov 21 04:55:12 1998 From: alarm at HK.Super.NET (ALARM (APEC Labour Rights Monitor)) Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1998 11:55:12 -0800 Subject: [asia-apec 903] Workers Rights are Human Rights Message-ID: <199811200408.MAA27660@kwaifong.hk.super.net> Dear friends, December 10 is marked as International Human Rights day. We encourage everyone to initiate activities on this day to promote workers rights as human rights. Details of planned activities can be sent through ALARM for dissemination, solidarity and linking. We hope to hear from you. In solidarity, Bong ---------------------------------------- ALARM Project, c/o AMRC 444 Nathan Road, 8-B Kowloon, Hong Kong T# +852 2332-1346 F# +852 2385-5319 From pspd at soback.kornet.nm.kr Fri Nov 20 14:40:11 1998 From: pspd at soback.kornet.nm.kr (PSPD) Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1998 14:40:11 +0900 Subject: [asia-apec 904] NSL Statement in South Korea References: <199811200408.MAA27660@kwaifong.hk.super.net> Message-ID: <365500BA.EABA5140@soback.kornet.nm.kr> Dear Friends, Korea Human Rights Network(KOHRNET) will be holding a rally on 1 December in Seoul, Korea. This date is significant as it is the 50th Anniversary of the South Korean NSL and also because of the upcoming 50th Anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights on 10 December. To give some background, the Asia Pacific Human Rights NGOs' Facilitating Team(FT), ooperation with the ICHRDD, has proposed the "98-99 International Campaign on Human Rights Violations under the National Security Laws" by targeting South Korea, China, Indonesia and India. Korean human rights NGOs, including KOHRNET, have been campaigning in various ways on human rights violations under the National Security Law. KOHRNET has agreed to focus on the democratic reform of the security regime in Korea during the years of 1998 and 1999, through cooperation with the FT and other international partners in the campaign, and work in solidarity with other countries in Asia with similar issues of national security. KOHRNET would like to contribute to building consensus among Asian NGOs that the National Security Law is the common and most urgent issue to address in the region. As a friend and supporter of the democratic movement in South Korea, we are asking organizations to sign our 'Declaration on the Repealment of the South Korean National Security Law.' This would help us in our event and also serve to show the widespread support throughout Asia on this issue. We are enclosing a draft copy of the declaration, and hope to receive your response by November 25, as well as any additions or comments. Thank you for your time in this matter. Best Regards, Sarah Chee Coordinator for International Solidarity Statement to Abolish the National Security Law(Draft) Considering that the 1 December, 1998 is the 50th Anniversary of the National Security Law in South Korea, Recognizing that the National Security Law was modelled after the Public Order and Security Law used under Japanese colonialism to punish Korean independence activists, Recognizing furthermore that the National Security Law is also a result of the division of the Korean peninsula and the Cold War, and a remnant of past repressive dictatorships, Convinced that the National Security Law has been used to cause the suffering of people who promote democracy and are devoted to reunification, Convinced futhermore that the government and investigation agencies which are responsible for the enforcement of the National Security Law violate the basic rights of citizens, Stressing that each advent of new dictatorial powers brought about negative revisions in the National Security Law, giving more power to government agencies which in turn gave legitimacy and permanence to the dictatorship, Emphasizing that the existence of the National Security Law and the government agencies that were empowered by it, led to violations of not only civil and political rights, but also social, economic, and cultural rights of the Korean people, and acts as a hurdle to the dignity of human beings and the positive development of Korean society, Acknowledging that the Cold War has virtually ceased worldwide, and relations between south and north Korea is marked by a new atmosphere of reconciliation, Considering that the current president of Korea was also sentenced by the National Security Law in past dictatorships, the 'new human rights government' was touted as a slogan for the new government, a promise to the world that human rights would be protected, We, the South Korean people, remember the insistence of the current Korean president on the need to create alternative laws and abolish the National Security Law which violates human rights while he was leader of the opposition party. We affirm that the repeal of the National Security Law and the absolute guarantee of democracy and human rights is the best way to attain true national security, based on the ideology of people's security. Therefore we cannot be satisfied with mere alternative laws and we expected the phasing out of the National Security Law and the application of human rights according to international standards with the inauguration of the new president. However, in the close to one year since the new government in Korea has been in power, we cannot help but be disappointed by the lack of positive measures to deal with the National Security Law. Furthermore, after the inauguration of the new government, the majority of political prisoners imprisoned for violating the National Security Law were not granted amnesty, and we are outraged at the injustice of having almost 300 people arrested under the NSL already this year. We feel that the current South Korean government is not different from past dictatorships and the 'human rights policy' maintained by the current president is merely a political slogan. Because half a century has already passed, and we cannot wait any longer for the abolishment of the National Security Law. Demands: We, the undersigned, demand that the National Security Law in south Korea be repealed, We demand the abolishment of national security laws and other injust laws in Asia and the world, reconfirm our efforts to struggle in solidarity to attain these goals, We demand that the current government in South Korea immediately release all political prisoners who were arrested by the National Security Law and the reform of investigative agencies empowered by the National Security Law. _____________ Korea Human Rights Network 592-7 Changshin 2-dong, Jongro-gu, Seoul, Korea 110-542 TEL 822-763-2606 FAX 822-745-5604 gomb@chollian.net From panap at panap.po.my Fri Nov 20 11:50:34 1998 From: panap at panap.po.my (PAN Asia Pacific) Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1998 11:50:34 Subject: [asia-apec 905] Paper from the APPA Forum on Land, Food Security and Agriculture Message-ID: <3209@panap.po.my> This is a paper from Ana de Ita of CECCAM, Mexico. Ana was going to present it at the Forum on Land, Food Security, and Agriculture but had to cancel at the last nminute. The impact of NAFTA on food security and the proposal for reordering Mexican territory Ana de Ita* Mexico’s geographical situation —being so close, yet so far away from the United States— has implied profound changes related to the reordering of international agricultural markets. These changes signify a new political and economic context for Mexico’s rural areas. Mexico is important for the United States for a number of reasons: as a market for its agricultural products and inputs; as a source of inexpensive labor for its maquiladora industries; as a backyard for locating companies that pollute the environment; as a trash dump for hazardous wastes; as the key for integrating the rest of Latin America into a Free Trade Area that can compete with the European Union; as a stage for launching its viewpoints in the World Trade Organization; and as a passageway for transporting its exports to Asian countries. To fulfill these objectives the United States—under the banner of “free trade”—negotiated NAFTA1 with Mexico, and the agreement went into effect on January 1, 1994. Two countries with profound asymmetries in their levels of development are treated as equals in this agreement. Its most radical aspect is its treatment of agriculture: Mexico included all of its agricultural products in the category for liberalization by 2004, with the exception of some “sensitive” products slated for the year 2008. Although Mexico had participated in GATT since 1986, the commitments for agriculture which came out of the Uruguay Round of 1995 were much more flexible than those adopted with NAFTA. It is important to note that NAFTA has an especially determining influence on Mexico’s domestic agricultural policies since 75% of the country’s foreign trade is with the United States, and this was true even before the agreement’s signing. In Mexico agricultural reforms aimed to modernize the country side “with some prodding kicks and blows from the market” were initiated before NAFTA was signed. But the agreement served to definitively close the door on any possibility for reversing this trend. Objectives of both the reforms and NAFTA include dismantling the peasant economy and privatizing and concentrating resources, income and power, under the pretext of modernizing segments of traditional agriculture, through national and foreign private investment. I will be analyzing only the impacts related to food security and the reordering of territory, in order to focus on the objectives of this Conference and because of their significance for peasant economy and organization. i. Food Security The production of basic grains and oilseeds is fundamental for guaranteeing the population’s food security and the survival of approximately three million peasants who grow these products. Eighty percent of cultivated land is used to grow these products. The remaining 20% is used for growing vegetables and tropical crops such as coffee and sugar cane (4%) and fruit production (14%). Nevertheless, the production of basic grains is not given any comparative advantages with respect to production in the United States and Canada, both considered to be among the world’s major barns. These products were sacrificed in the NAFTA negotiations, in favor of fruit and vegetables. The final agreement was the result of the desire of the national political elite in the three countries to dismantle existing rural protection programs.2 Agricultural policies aimed at protecting basic grains—corn, beans, wheat, sorghum, soybeans and others—were eliminated between 1990 and 1994. Previously, these grains benefited from required prior permission for importing, a system of price guarantees—generally higher than international prices—and a system of subsidies for inputs. When NAFTA went into effect, sorghum was left without any protection; a 15% tariff was placed on wheat to be gradually reduced until its disappearance by the year 2004; a 10% tariff was placed on soybeans— when imported between October and December—to be reduced over a ten-year period. And, for corn and beans, considered the most “sensitive” products, quota- tariffs were negotiated, 139% for beans and 215% for corn, to be eliminated by the year 2008. The initial quota for beans for the United States was 50,000 tons, and for corn, 2.5 million tons, to be incremented 3% annually. These commitments are much more radical than those required of underdeveloped countries by the World Trade Organization (WTO), and the commitments made by Mexico to the WTO. 1. Between NATFA and domestic policy The importing of basic grains has increased significantly during the past four years and ten months since NAFTA went into effect, and it is threatening the country’s food security. Dependency on importing will continue to grow as trade liberalization continues advancing. Mexico imported approximately 9% of basic grains consumed in 1990; by 1993 this amount had increased to 23%; by 1996, the amount was 30%, and by July 1998, imports had increased by 17.2%. We see one of the worst examples of the effects of agricultural trade liberalization in corn, the basis of the Mesoamerican diet and culture. According to Mexican negotiators, corn was to be better protected than any other product as a result of NAFTA, but experience proves the opposite. Import quotas assigned to the United States were exceeded in 1995, again in 1996, and the same will be true 1998. Despite record production of corn in 1996, the government practiced dumping against the interests of Mexican farmers when it allowed tariff-free importation of 5.8 million tons—more than twice the amount specified by NAFTA of 2.652 million tons—and it treated China and South Africa as member countries. The government favored the major transnational trade and industrial corporations which take advantage of subsidized credits granted by the United States through the Commodity Credit Corporation and turn Mexican imports into a financial business. Mexico’s line of credit was 1.5 billion dollars. By unilaterally eliminating the 189% tariff for that year, Mexico received 1.028 billion dollars less in taxes. And, imports drove domestic prices down to the level of international prices. When small corn producers in Chiapas mobilized and blocked highways to demand fair prices for their crops, the government—backed by the army and policy—resorted to repression, leaving three farmers dead and others injured. On the international market there are mechanisms for preventing cases of dumping. In Mexico, however, it is the government that practices dumping, and it responds to justified protests with repression. In the case of beans, quotas were exceeded by 129% in 1996, and by July 1998 they had been exceeded by 90%. Wheat imports increased at a dizzying speed from 1990 to 1997. During this period, Mexico increased its wheat imports from 339,000 tons to 1.78 million tons. Although the government criticizes State intervention, practices which worked against producers during 1995 and 1996 fixed wheat prices below international levels. Soybean growing has practically disappeared because of trade liberalization. By 1997, only 6% of the volume from 1989 was produced, and consequently, nearly all soybean consumption depends on imports. Commitments made between Mexico and the United States as part of NAFTA are a clear example of market reordering. Mexico, an underdeveloped country, sacrificed its population’s food consumption and accepted producing exotic, luxury products for the elite of the North. Not satisfied with only poorly negotiating the international agreement, the Mexican government has gone on to apply agricultural policies much worse than NAFTA requirements in order to benefit private interests. 2. US agricultural policy and international prices. In 1996 the United States reformed the agricultural policy which had been in effect for the previous six decades. The changes were in favor of agrofood corporations. The new agricultural law, the Fair Act, proposed increasing the supply of grains, artificially fixing low prices in the international market, and promoting exports through subsidies.3 And thus, peasant in Mexico are subject to “double dumping:” that committed by the United States in the world grain market, and that committed by the Mexican government when it unilaterally eliminates the little protection granted by NAFTA to producers. 3. Decoupling subsidies witout peasant accountability Before NAFTA began, the system of subsidies for inputs and prices was changed to subsidies by hectare decoupling to volume, price and product, and which will be provided for all basic grains in a constant amount in real terms over a period of 15 years. These subsidies were reduced by 30% from 1994 to 1998. The combination of low international prices and an over-supply of grains, together with declining government-fixed domestic prices, subsidy reduction and unilateral elimination of tariffs has left producers in an open market, swimming among the sharks. As predicted, the difficulties for underdeveloped countries to use the few mechanisms granted by the “free market” for protecting their food security are not only technical and external, but as in the case of Mexico, they respond to the particular interests of the dominant elite and transnational corporations. Peasants do not have democratic means for influencing public policies, and at every harvest cycle, they are obliged to carry out protests for demanding a better income from their products, through increases in prices and subsidies. Nonetheless, peasant organizations have been unable to spark a generalized, broad-based movement that would make it possible to change agricultural policy, and consequently, the peasants’ historical conquests have been gradually lost. There are two alarming tendencies as a result of this policy. First, the lack of financing for agriculture. -commercial banks are uninterested in financing agriculture and the government development bank has radically reduced its participation in providing funds- added to the difficulties of marketing their products, means small farmers with high productive potential enter agricultural systems by way of contracts with transnational companies. Major Mexican companies and transnational partners are becoming increasingly integrated. Second, another dangerous consequence is the tendency toward land dedicated to grain production to be in the hands of an increasingly smaller group. According to conservative figures based only on available government indicators, the number of basic grain producers has decreased by 437,000, or 20%, between 1993 and 1998. The land dedicated to these crops has slightly increased. These two tendencies paint a new political panorama for Mexico’s countryside in which transnational companies and major Mexican firms are gradually acquiring more control of basic grain production and markets, thus weakening possibilities for peasants to play a more active role in productive processes. The latter was the focus around which the most important independent peasant organizations formed during the 1980s and up to the time of the reforms. UNORCA is one of those organizations. ii Agrarian counter-reform One of the main conquests of the peasant revolution of 1910 in México was the land ownership system, under the form of ejido or social property. Article 27 of the Constitution prevented large concentrations of land in a few hands, and prohibited domestic or foreign mercantile societies from owning land. In the NAFTA negotiations, the ejido was considered a “non-tariff barrier” in preventing foreigners from receiving the same treatment as a dosmestic subjects (“natinal treatment”). Article 27 was modified to promote a market in land and private investment, and to spur land privatization and concentration, Agricultural counter-reform signified the breaking up of the social “pact” reached by peasants and the post-revolutionary State. In a broader geopolitical framework, Andrés Barreda4 demonstrates that in the United States, agricultural, cattle, mineral, petroleum and industrial production, highway and railroad infrastructure and the major population centers are all concentrated in the eastern half of the country. The particular geography of the United States—with the Rocky Mountains as a wall between the East and the West—implies high transportation costs and difficulties in moving production to the Pacific coast. The triumph over Japan in the Second World War consolidated the US hegemony in the Pacific Ocean and made it possible for the United States to control vigorous industrialization along Asian’s eastern coast. But now, in the 1990s, with China entering into capitalist competition, the United States is pressuring for reorganization of its capital, devaluating labor prices and reducing costs of transporting its goods. The inverted map of North America and the Caribbean demonstrates that the best connection between the US northeast region and the Pacific Basin passes through Mexican and Central American territories which are located between the two extremes of inter-ocean communication. The United States is seeking to establish new trade routes in which corridors of pseudo assembly industries will be installed. They will be subordinated to the major industrial centers and will facilitate increasing their competitiveness, by taking advantage of inexpensive Mexican and Central American labor and monopolizing the natural resources it finds in its path. The Mexican government has become a part of the project for subordinating national territory to the interests of US capital. For the privatization of territory linked to the gradual increase in the control over production and markets by transnational companies, the peasants presence in 28,000 ejidos across the country represents an obstacle. Agricultural reforms are staking out their disappearance. Paradoxically, the first day that NAFTA entered into effect, the peasants and indigenous peoples of Chiapas organized in the Ejército Zapatista de Liberación Nacional (EZLN, the Zapatista National Liberation Army) rose up to demand: “Enough!” Among their demands, was rejection of the agrarian counter- reform and NAFTA, and they championed the fight against neo-liberalism. The first agreement signed by the Mexican government with the Zapatistas was on the autonomy of indigenous peoples—which the government now refuses to comply with. The demand for autonomy enters into direct conflict with the plan to reorder Mexican territory according to the interests of the United States, the Mexican government, and national and transnational elite. This is especially true since this demand identifies the right of indigenous peoples to collectively use and enjoy their natural resources and territories. The public consultation currently promoted by the EZLN to find out the viewpoints of the Mexican society—in each of the country’s local districts—is one of the actions in Mexico which can stop the advance of transnational companies, the expulsion of peasants from their lands, and the privatization of life. * Researcher at the Centro de Estudios para el Cambio en el Campo Mexicano (Ceccam, Centre of Studies for Rural Change in México) This document was prepared for the Land, Food Security and Agriculture Forum at the Asian Pacifica Peoples Summit in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, November 11-12, 1998. 1 NAFTA also includes Canada. Actually, there are three different agreements: the one between the United States and Canada in effect since 1988; between the United States and Mexico; and between Mexico and Canada. 2 See Luis Hernández, “TLC and agricultura” (NAFTA and Agriculture). 3 Victor Suárez, “Fair Act,” in Cuadernos del Ceccam, No. 20, April 1997. 4 Andrés Barreda, “La subordinación del sureste mexicano a la geoeconomía y geopolítica norteamericanas,” Centro de Análisis Social, Información y Formación Popular (Center for Social Analysis, Information and Grassroots Training). 6 From tpl at cheerful.com Sat Nov 21 09:12:35 1998 From: tpl at cheerful.com (tpl@cheerful.com) Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1998 08:12:35 +0800 Subject: [asia-apec 906] November 25 Protest Action vs Violence Against Women Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.19981121081235.006a019c@pop.skyinet.net> INTERNATIONAL DAY OF PROTEST ON VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN November 25, 1998 Please Bring Flowers and Candles (To Remember the Victims in Indonesia) World Against Racism Movement (WARM), a non-governmental organization established to promote social peace and to fight racism, supports the November 25 (Wednesday) rally to be led by GABRIELA to protest violence against women. On the same day, marked as "International Day of Protest on Violence Against Women," WARM and multi-sectoral business, civic, religious and student groups will hold a Protest Rally outside the Indonesian Embassy (185 Salcedo St. Legaspi Village, Makati). Assembly for rallyists is 2:00 P.M. at Ayala Avenue across Rustan's while the main rally will be held at 3:15 P.M. at the Indonesian Embassy. WARM and the other groups will condemn the military-instigated May 1998 riots and gang-rapes of the ethnic Chinese minority, especially women and girls as young as nine years old. The Nov. 25 rally at the Indonesian Embassy will also hold a memorial ceremony in memory of the May victims and the 17-year-old human rights volunteer Ita Haryono who was killed. Ita Heryono was active in helping ethnic Chinese rape victims, and her brutal murder had been condemned by international human rights groups. WARM CONDEMNS GENERAL WIRANTO OF INDONESIAN MILITARY Last May 13 to 15, 1998, the Indonesian military instigated riots, lootings, gang-rapes and killings victimizing the ethnic Chinese minority to deflect public anger at government corruption and the economic crisis. Unofficial estimates that 468 women and girls as young as nine years old were gang-raped, while Indonesian NGO human rights had officially reported 168 rape victims. Last Nov. 3, 1998, an Indonesian government report said there were 66 rape victims, but General Wiranto denied the Indonesian military had any involvement in these barbaric crimes. After the May 1998 military-instigated riots, other new victims include the rape and murder of 17-year-old human rights volunteer Ita Heryono. Remember the crimes of May 1998, demand justice and truth! Let us unite to fight state racism and help stop the oppression of ethnic minorities! From alarm at HK.Super.NET Sun Nov 22 06:45:10 1998 From: alarm at HK.Super.NET (ALARM (APEC Labour Rights Monitor)) Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1998 13:45:10 -0800 Subject: [asia-apec 907] Workers Rights are Human Rights, Prostitutes Collective Message-ID: <199811210544.NAA02010@kwaifong.hk.super.net> -------------------------------------------Dear friends, Following is a message from our friends in Cambodia (CWDA) re: their campaign among sex workers. If you know of any groups working on the same issue or have any materials/papers, please forward it thru alarm@hk.super.net or cwda@bigpond.com.kh. In solidarity, Bong ---------- > From: CWDA > To: ALARM (APEC Labour Rights Monitor) > Subject: Re: Workres Rights are Human Rights, Prostitutes Collective > Date: 20 November 1998 20:10 > > Dear Bong > > I just received your message regarding the Human Rights campaign; So I > will take this opprtunity to let you know that here in Cambodia we have > launched a campaign amongst the Sex Workers to commence the process of > implementing a Prostitutes Union. So far the response is great among the > sex workers. The situation is very difficult in Cambodia for sex workers > because their status is not recognised by the government; and of course it > is in the interest of the international NGO's who are christian or > moralistic about this issue to prevent us from doing our work. > > I guess what I would like is for contacts around the world preferably in > Asia who are doing similar work. In addition i was wondering if your group > could forward relevant literature; both academic and report fashion to > assist us with our struggles. > > Your comrade from Cambodia > > Rosanna Barbero. ---------------------------------------- ALARM Project, c/o AMRC 444 Nathan Road, 8-B Kowloon, Hong Kong T# +852 2332-1346 F# +852 2385-5319 From amittal at foodfirst.org Sat Nov 21 10:56:56 1998 From: amittal at foodfirst.org (Anuradha Mittal) Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1998 17:56:56 -0800 Subject: [asia-apec 908] Angry Students Denounce Proposed $50 Million Alliance between Biotech Giant Novartis and UC Berkeley's College of Natural Resources Message-ID: FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE November 20, 1998 Contact: Faith Kearns Students for Responsible Research (510) 526-0920 / (510) 642-6315 Angry Students Denounce Proposed $50 Million Alliance between Biotech Giant Novartis and UC Berkeley's College of Natural Resources WHO: Students for Responsible Research (Graduate students from the College of Natural Resources) WHERE: UC Berkeley Campus, Koshland Hall (near Oxford and Hearst), Room 338 WHEN: Immediately following the UC Berkeley Chancellor's press conference which will be held at 11:00 A.M. Despite significant student and faculty concern, Chancellor Berdahl plans to formally announce a "strategic" alliance between UC Berkeley's College of Natural Resources and the biotechnology conglomerate Novartis. In recent weeks, Students for Responsible Research has voiced objections to the agreement and attempted to secure information about the contract. Although students have been excluded from negotiations and full access to information about the contract, Students for Responsible Research opposes the agreement because: A $50 million alliance with a particular corporation will undoubtedly bias directions of research at UC Berkeley, a public institution. This alliance indicates UC Berkeley's implicit endorsement of biotech research, a field dedicated to profit-oriented genetic solutions rather than sustainable agricultural practices. This alliance sets a precedent for the privatization of scientific research at publicly funded institutions of higher learning. Anuradha Mittal Policy Director Institute for Food and Development Policy - Food First 398 60th Street, Oakland, CA 94618 Phone: (510) 654-4400 Fax: (510) 654-4551 http://www.foodfirst.org From dbuchana at vcn.bc.ca Sat Nov 21 16:37:18 1998 From: dbuchana at vcn.bc.ca (David Buchanan) Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1998 23:37:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: [asia-apec 909] Human Rights: In our Own Back Yard Message-ID: 3RD ANNUAL AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS FILM FEST __________________________________________________________________ In celebration of the 50th Anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the 25th Anniversary of Amnesty International in Canada, Group 17 presents the 3rd Annual Amnesty International Film Festival on Friday, November 27 and Saturday, November 28, 1998. Films addressing world wide human rights concerns will be screened at Pacific Cinémathèque, 1131 Howe Street (at Helmcken) in Vancouver. Tickets will be available at the door only, 30 minutes prior to showtime. Ticket prices are $ 7.00 Adults and $ 5.00 Students/Seniors Schedule and Program Notes Friday, November 27 7 p.m. - Double Feature Waiting Canada, 1996, 33 minutes Director: Marie-Claude Harvey/Producer: Iolande Cadrin-Rossignol A civil war has divided Sudan in two, with the southern part itself torn by many factions. All too often, famine has struck. In the six-month period from January to July 1993, famine decimated a population of 1,800,000. Now it has returned. Hoping for a new season, a new harvest, and the end of the war, the Dinka of Alek have requested aid. Sacks of grain are dropped from planes, but to prevent rioting, distribution is delayed until the arrival of reinforcements. During this week of waiting, we witness the face of hunger, bearing witness to it through a first-person account. The filmmaker's sole intent is to give hunger a human form, to capture the hope for survival on film, soberly, without pandering to the mass media. Gerrie and Louise Canada, 1996, 74 minutes Director: Sturla Gunnarsson/Producers: Phyllis Brown, Sturla Gunnarsson, David York Gerrie and Louise tells a harrowing, fascinating and profoundly touching story. At its centre is a marriage that has to contend with staggering issues of betrayal and trust, a relationship that serves as a microcosm for the moral compromise holding together the post-apartheid peace in South Africa. It bears the compassion and insight, to help us examine the human beings behind covert operations against the African National Congress. Colonel Gerrie Hugo, a seasoned veteran of covert wars, was brought back to South Africa for the Apartheid Government's "Total Onslaught" against the ANC. Louise Flanagan, an acclaimed journalist, wrote stories about South Africa's hit squads, and became the chief investigator of the Truth Commission in the Eastern Cape Province. Friday, November 27 9:30 p.m. - Double Feature Cases of Violence Against Native Communities in Chiapas Chiapas, 1998, 52 minutes Director/Producer: Carlos Martinez Suarez B.C. Premiere Guest Speaker Carlos Martinez Suarez fearlessly documents the realities of native communities in Chiapas, where he has been living for many years. He describes some of his documentaries as "emergency videos" because of the urgency to have them circulated both locally and internationally. Cases of Violence depicts the courage of the native communities, displaced by incidents and threats of terror by paramilitary groups linked to the ruling party, in both Prado Pacayal and X'oyep. On December 22, 1997, when 45 refugees are massacred in Acteal, the government responds by sending in troops to "maintain peace" in the region. Defenseless, without arms, the communities protest the presence of the military, urging it to leave. Many powerful and courageous moments are captured in this video. The Devil's Dream Canada, 1992, 68 minutes Director: Mary Ellen Davis/Producer: Adam Symansky and Carmen Garcia Guatemala is a society split between native and "ladino," rich and poor, civil and military. Native people pick cotton for two dollars a day, their children work for half that amount. Those who dare to protest risk their lives. This award-winning documentary permits the people to tell their story in their own words. The Dance of the 24 Devils, a Guatemalan folk dance, is the vehicle used to shed light on the many-layered realities of today's Guatemala. Combining lyricism, realism and irony, Davis explores the soul of this paradoxical country. We discover not only the beauty of the landscape, the people and their creative imagination, but also the wretched conditions of life, the unrelenting spectre of violence and a pervasive sense of absurd. Saturday, November 28 7 p.m. - Double Feature The Sky: A Silent Witness England, 1995, 27 minutes Director/Producer: Midge Mackenzie The wide-open sky is a metaphor for the space that bears witness, and offers acceptance, as human beings grapple with their experience. In this film, the sky is witness to stark stories shared by women activists in this documentary. They include a Tibetan Buddhist nun, a Tiananmen Square demonstrator, and an African American civil rights worker, testifying about human rights abuses in their own countries. Produced in association with Amnesty International, these compelling stories are intertwined with striking black-and-white footage. Produced in association with Amnesty International, The Sky speaks volumes about human rights. Burma Diary Thailand, 1997, 55 minutes Director/Producer: Jeanne Hallacy Guest Speaker Burma Diary shares four years in the life of Tint Aung, a vibrant leader for the student democratic movement in Burma. Hallacy records the ongoing struggle for Tint Aung and his family, starting after the "The Massacre of 8-8-88", where thousands of students were killed during a demonstration in Rangoon. Many members of the All Burma Student Democratic Front fled to communities in exile on the Thai-Burma border, in attempt to protect themselves from the ruthless military regime, SLORC (State Law and Order Restoration Council). Tint Aung's personal quest mirrors the larger political conquest for change and democracy in Burma. This is an intimate insight into the spirit of the democratic movement in Burma. Saturday, November 28 9 p.m. Kundun USA, 1997, 135 minutes Director: Martin Scorsese Producer: Barbara De Fina Speaker: Canada Tibet Committee This remarkable drama traces the true story of the Dalai Lama, recognized in 1937 as the 14th reincarnation of the Buddha of Compassion, when he was a young child in Tibet. Destined to become the spiritual and political leader of his country, the Dalai Lama's early life was focussed on training and developing those qualities necessary for him to carry out his daunting responsibilities as Tibet's "God king." In dramatizing the Dalai Lama's childhood and adolescence, the brutal Chinese invasion of Tibet, and the arduous journey into exile, Kundun fuses the Dalai Lama's prophetic dreams and visions with the miserable transformation of Tibet into a prison that is, to this day, occupied by China. A magnificent Hollywood production, which the Chinese government banned and loudly denounced, Kundun has been described by critics as Scorsese's best film. From tpl at cheerful.com Sat Nov 21 19:22:58 1998 From: tpl at cheerful.com (tpl@cheerful.com) Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1998 18:22:58 +0800 Subject: [asia-apec 910] women's workshop unity statement Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.19981121182258.006c6108@pop.skyinet.net> >3rd International Women's Conference Against APEC >Workshop on Strategies, Gains and Challenges >in Women's Struggle Against Globalization >sponsored by APWLD, GABRIELA, SRED and >Tamilnadu Women's Forum > >Statement of Unity > >We say NO to globalization! We say YES to resistance and common action! > >We, women representing organizations from various parts of the world, come together to affirm our unity and commitment to be at the forefront of the continuing struggle against globalization. > >We say no to economic policies wreaking havoc on the lives of people all over the world. Women suffer the most disastrous impact of globalization as it continues to marginalize, displace and turn millions of women into modern-day slaves. > >We say no to unparalled mass lay-offs and labor flexibilization schemes such as casualization and contractualization. Asian women have become the cheapest source of labor as they work longer hours, are paid the lowest of wages and subjected to miserable working conditions in and out of their countries. >Capitalists resort to union busting and other forms of trade union repression and deny the workers the rights that they have gained through years of struggle. > >We say no to landlessness and displacement of peasant and indigenous women and agricultural workers. TNCs acquire vast tracts of agricultural land for land-use and crop conversion, and governments pay lip service to genuine land reform. Plantation and other agricultural workers get slave wages and suffer the harshest working conditions. > >We say no to prostitution and sexual slavery. Extreme poverty has resulted into graver forms of violence against women and children. Globalization has forced women to migrate exposing them to trafficking. > >We say no to communalism and fundamentalism. They perpetuate patriarchal and repressive religious, cultural and traditional norms and practices that take us back to the medieval period. > >We say no to state repression against peoples' dissent and resistance. The state, which represents not the people but the monopoly capitalists and the local elite, use repression, terrorism and other violations of human rights to cow and control the people. They use rape, mutilation and other forms of sexual violence to enslave women. > >We say no to mainstreaming women in the neo-liberal development model. It only makes women a major source of cheap, docile and flexible labor for TNCs and other foreign employers. It obscures unemployment and under employment. It depoliticizes the women's movement and takes women's initiatives away from their struggle for emancipation. > >We say NO to globalization! We say YES to resistance and common action! > >We say yes to women workers' strikes, peasant rallies, student protests, boycotts, pickets, demonstrations, caravans and all other forms of women's action to thwart the onslaught of globalization on women's lives. > >We say yes to awareness-raising, political education and mass organizing that would militate, expand and consolidate the fighting ranks of women within and across nations. > >We say yes to the widest range of strategies and alternatives that bring women from all oppressed sectors and classes together to share experiences, take joint actions, struggle against all forms of discrimination and transform our lives. > >We say yes to uniting and integrating women's actions with democratic, progressive and militant peoples' movements to advance the cause of grassroots and other women. > >We say yes to building a broad-based, strong and united front against globalization and all forms of imperialist offensive against women and all other peoples of the world. > >How grim the future would be under conditions of imperialist globalization. How bright the future would be for nations and peoples fighting for self-determination, and for women fighting for true liberation. > > From gattwd at corso.ch.planet.gen.nz Mon Nov 23 08:18:37 1998 From: gattwd at corso.ch.planet.gen.nz (Gatt Watchdog) Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1998 11:18:37 +1200 Subject: [asia-apec 911] NZ Herald on APEC Message-ID: Weekend Herald November 21-22 1998, Auckland, New Zealand Stances of a stateswoman This week's Apec summit was Jenny Shipley's first big test on the international diplomatic circuit. How did she go? John Armstrong, Political Editor in Kuala Lumpur "A rose among thorns," cooed one Kuala Lumpur newspaper on Thursday, having observed Jenny Shipley glide around the bizarrely-named Cyberview Lodge with other leaders as Apec sauntered to a close. But Jenny Shipley proved she could be as thorny as the rest of them. One phrase - "megaphone diplomacy" - turned what otherwise would have been a pretty low-key first outing into a qualified success, at least in diplomatic terms. It immediately boosted the profile of the Prime Minister way above tiresome "only-woman-at-the-summit" cliches. The straight-talking, as it often does, could have got her into real trouble. It did back home. But her intervention went down a treat with Asian colleagues sick of American bullying. And the Americans did not really care. Going into her first big international assignment, she did even more homework than her usual satchel-loads before she got on the plane to Malaysia. She needed to. It is not her style not to make a contribution, even though the temptation might have been to sit back and absorb the dynamics, rather than intervene in highly-charged debates. And New Zealand is the incoming chair of Apec. Other countries were looking for a steer for where it plans to take things leading up to the Auckland summit next September. She will have to pause for breath on trade liberalisation. Despite her unstinting passion for more speed, Apec is stalled on that front. The fiasco over fast-track tariff cuts for fish and forestry - which degenerated into a test of will between Japan and ardent free-traders like New Zealand - was over before she had even got off the plane. Mrs Shipley will have to live with her disappointment on the trade liberalisation front, but she managed to squeeze on to the winning side of arguments about the Anwar Ibrahim case. It was the old dilemma. How do you satisfy domestic pressure to talk tough on human rights without upsetting a long-standing ally? Or be seen to be interfering in a host country's domestic politics? Or risk allowing the argument to overshadow what is an economic forum faced with an unprecedented economic crisis? Her approach was to quarantine the issue on the presumption that one can talk honestly to a "good friend", as she insists she did during her Tuesday morning bilateral with Dr Mahathir, Malaysia's crusty prime minister. She says the Anwar case took up most of the half-hour meeting. But Mrs Shipley's moderate ticking-off of Dr Mahathir was no match for the potent symbolism of a horde of foreign ministers, including Australia's, trotting off to see Anwar's wife, Wan Azizah. The possibility of such a visit from New Zealand's foreign minister was dismissed by Don McKinnon as a "token gesture". That left Mrs Shipley in the lurch. New Zealand also looked to be doing the Malaysians bidding when she accused Al Gore of engaging in "megaphone diplomacy". But the sentiment shifted rapidly against the vice-president. She struck a chord with other leaders already wondering about the United States' commitment to Apec, given Bill Clinton's absence and suspicions that Gore's remarks in favour of Anwar might have more to do with the next presidential election than helping a jaied Malaysian politician. Gore was also coming under criticism from American big-wigs in Kuala Lumpur. Anwar's supporters, too, decried his intervention, fearing it would only help rally support nationwide for the embattled Dr Mahathir. Mrs Shipley must now pray that her patience with Dr Mahathir is not repaid with a post-summit crackdown on dissent on the streets of Kuala Lumpur. What Apec really stands for We've been told that Apec is short for Asia-Pacific Economic Co-operation. Co-operation? Thay've got to be joking. Here's what the acronym really stands for: A is for Aggravation. Lots of it. Standing for hours in 32-degree heat and 90 per cent humidity knowing nothing is going to happen. Being herded like cattle from one photo-opportunity to the next. Spin doctors telling you how well things are going when they are obviously falling apart. Taxi drivers suddenly losing their sense of direction after years of driving around Kuala Lumpur. Being stuck in another traffic jam as another motorcade delivers another leader to another slap-up dinner. Hotel owners hiking their room rates. Hotel lifts reserved for VIPs so they do not have to wait a few moments like the rest of mankind. Other people's cellphones. Especially ones with silly rings. And security checks, security checks and more security checks. P is for Pressing the Flesh. Hour after hour, processions of leaders, ministers and officials sweep along corridors from meeting to meeting, politely shaking hands with old enemies and then telling their media entourage outrageous exaggerations about what was said behind closed doors. P is also for Press Conferences. You can guarantee you'll miss the one where someone actually says something. P is also for Protest. For once, there was something to protest about. But the riots everyone expected never materialised - much to the disappointment of the media. E is for Embarrassment. This year's Egg on Your Face Award goes to Al Gore. America's Veep got just about everyone's back up with his lavish praise of Malaysia's opposition forces. He earned the wrath of American business and former American envoys in Kuala Lumpur for the summit. Even the people he was supposed to be helping - Anwar Ibrahim's supporters - were cursing him. They feared his remarks would swing fiercely nationalistic Malays back behind Dr Mahathir. Second prize goes to Malaysian television which managed to lose the sound feed to the media centre just as Dr Mahathir began to read the summit's communique to the world's journalists. Rich irony, considering his underlings had deliberately disrupted satellite transmission of television pictures of riots during September's Commonwealth Games. C is for Communique. And Compromise. Two naughty, inseparable twins. This year's declaration looked as fresh as week-old bread. And about as digestible. Most of it was drafted weeks ago and then watered down as officials haggled over every word, comma and full-stop. Are the politicians really there just to make up the numbers? Of course they are. And don't forget: Apec also stands for Ageing Politicians Enjoying Cocktails. From gattwd at corso.ch.planet.gen.nz Mon Nov 23 09:45:04 1998 From: gattwd at corso.ch.planet.gen.nz (Gatt Watchdog) Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1998 12:45:04 +1200 Subject: [asia-apec 912] APEC Ministerial Joint Statement Message-ID: Tenth APEC Ministerial Meeting Joint Statement Monday, 16 November 1998, 5:19 pm Press Release: TENTH APEC MINISTERIAL MEETING JOINT STATEMENT KUALA LUMPUR, MALAYSIA 14 - 15 NOVEMBER 1998 The Tenth Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) Ministerial Meeting was attended by Ministers from: Australia New Zealand Brunei Darussalam Papua New Guinea Canada Peru Chile Republic of the Philippines The People's Republic of China Russia Hong Kong, China Singapore Indonesia Chinese Taipei Japan Thailand The Republic of Korea United States of America Malaysia Vietnam Mexico Members of the APEC Secretariat were also present. The Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN) Secretariat, the Pacific Economic Cooperation Council (PECC) and the South Pacific Forum attended as observers. The meeting was chaired by the Honourable Dato' Seri Rafidah Aziz, Minister of International Trade and Industry, Malaysia. On behalf of the meeting, she welcomed new members - Peru, Russia and Vietnam. Financial Stability 2. Ministers reviewed recent developments in the world economy. They welcomed the 1998 APEC Economic Outlook, with its particular focus and comprehensive review of the current economic developments and prospects of the region. Ministers expressed concern that the financial crisis with its associated contagion effects has had serious socio-economic implications for growth, employment and poverty levels in member economies. Ministers tasked Senior Officials to intensify APEC's efforts to address the social impacts of the crisis as a high priority. 3. Ministers agreed that the major challenge before APEC is to advance policies and collaborative efforts directed at early recovery and sustainable growth in the region. Each economy, both industrialised and developing, has an important stake in this objective and a role in achieving it by implementing appropriate growth-oriented macro-economic policies and structural reforms. Ministers welcomed the efforts of affected economies to overcome the crisis. They also stressed the critical role of open markets in underpinning economic recovery. 4. Ministers supported the work programme of APEC Finance Ministers in strengthening the international and domestic financial systems, developing capital markets, liberalising capital accounts and formulating measures to build social safety nets in affected economies. 5. Ministers concurred that capacity building initiatives were integral in enhancing the resilience of domestic economies and their ability to withstand future economic turbulence. In this context, Ministers endorsed the Economic Governance Capacity Building Initiative and welcomed the work on corporate governance in the Finance Ministers' process. Ministers looked forward to progress on these initiatives. Trade and Investment Liberalisation and Facilitation (TILF) 6. Ministers reaffirmed their commitment to achieve APEC's trade and investment liberalisation goals through the process of individual and collective actions. Ministers viewed trade and investment liberalisation as an important element in restoring confidence in the region and in stimulating economic growth. 7. Individual Action Plans: Ministers endorsed the submission of improved 1998 Individual Action Plans (IAPs) and welcomed IAPs of the three new members. Ministers were encouraged by the continued implementation and improvements to the Plans, particularly by economies affected by the financial turmoil. Ministers commended the commitment to specific action and timelines, adherence to the 1997 revised format guidelines and consideration given to the APEC Business Advisory Council's (ABAC) recommendations. Ministers also welcomed the voluntary inclusion in a number of IAPs of financial sector reforms and other measures taken in response to the situation of financial instability. Ministers noted the usefulness of the current process of bilateral consultations and voluntary peer review in providing feedback for further improvements. In this regard, Ministers welcomed Korea's and Malaysia's submission of their IAPs for voluntary peer review and the offer from Australia, Brunei, Japan, Philippines, Chinese Taipei and United States to do so in 1999. Ministers agreed that Senior Officials should undertake a review, in 1999, to assess overall progress in IAPs in accordance with the principles, objectives and guidelines of the Osaka Action Agenda. Ministers reaffirmed the role of the IAPs as the primary mechanism for progressing APEC's trade and investment liberalisation and facilitation towards the Bogor goals. Trade and Investment Facilitation: 8. Ministers welcomed and endorsed the 1998 Committee on Trade and Investment (CTI) Annual Report to Ministers. They commended the CTI's work in facilitating a more open environment for trade and investment as well as in implementing activities to improve the flow of goods, services, capital, and technology that will be relevant to business. Ministers agreed that emphasis be given to action-oriented and focussed outcomes that will provide tangible benefits to members. Ministers welcomed the 1998 achievements of the CTI and the Working Groups and their work on: * alignment of member economies standards with international standards on electrical and electronic equipment in respect of safety and electromagnetic compatibility by 2004/2008 * agreement on the part of exchange of information of MRA for electrical and electronic equipment; * development of a menu of options for investment liberalisation and facilitation; * development of non-binding principles pertaining to value for money, open and effective competition, and fair dealing in government procurement; * implementation of phase 2 of the APEC Business Travel Card trial and collective commitment to expand the availability of multiple entry visas or permits for business purposes; * set of policy recommendations on the development of natural gas and promotion of energy efficiency; * development of comprehensive customs work programme on common data elements, risk management and express consignment clearance; * launch of the APECNet for business search and opportunities; * enhancement of information exchange and policy dialogue through the publications on APEC Energy Supply and Demand, IPR administration systems and the Business Residency Handbook; * comprehensive range of training and technical cooperation programmes undertaken in 1998; and * .the development of an APEC Directory of Professional Services that facilitates the provision of trade in services. 9. Ministers called for further development of Collective Action Plans (CAPs) and their implementation in 1999. In particular, Ministers called for intensified work on trade facilitation which encourages the use of technologies and techniques that will help members to build up expertise, reduce costs and lead to better movement of goods and services. They agreed that officials should examine how competition and regulatory reforms can contribute towards facilitating trade and investment. Ministers stressed the importance of the completion of TRIPs Implementation by APEC WTO member economies in 2000. In addition, they directed that priority be given in 1999 to the implementation of the multiyear training and technical cooperation programmes, including on standards and conformance, customs procedures, intellectual property, competition policy and business mobility as a means of enhancing members capacity in the TILF area and in implementing CAPs. 10. Ministers welcomed the actions taken by CTI and its sub-fora to invite, as appropriate, business/private sector contributions, including from ABAC in accordance with the agreed guidelines. Minsters encouraged actions by APEC fora that will increase benefits to SMEs. They further directed APEC fora to consider ways to enhance business/private sector support and contributions for APEC activities. 11. Early Voluntary Sectoral Liberalisation (EVSL): Minsters recognised the Early Voluntary Sectoral Liberalisation (EVSL) initiative as a significant step to advance the pace of liberalisation in APEC. The EVSL initiative, undertaken through the APEC principle of voluntarism, is an integrated approach to liberalisation through the incorporation of facilitation and economic and technical cooperation measures. 12. Ministers noted the progress made in 1998 in finalising the EVSL package: i. Participation by 16 economies in the EVSL process* ; ii. Results of the Kuching meeting on a framework for addressing EVSL, encompassing tariffs, facilitation and ECOTECH, and with respect to tariffs, end-rates, end dates and product coverage (including subsequent work) as well as guidelines on flexibility provisions; iii. Conformity with the end-rates and end-dates, as reflected in Table 1 in SOM Chair's report; and iv. Flexibility requests for end rates and end-dates as reflected in Table 2 of the SOM Chair's report. 13. Ministers agreed that APEC economies may implement immediately the tariff commitments on a voluntary basis. 14. Ministers agreed to commence implementation of facilitation, ECOTECH and other initiatives according to the agreed schedule in all 9 sectors. Additional facilitation and ECOTECH initiatives will be developed and implemented on a continuous basis. 15. Ministers of the 16 participating economics also agreed to improve and build on this progress in 1999; i. by broadening the participation in the tariff element beyond APEC to maximise the benefit of liberalisation. In this regard, the WTO process would be initiated immediately on the basis of the framework established in Kuching and subsequent information provided by economies, having regard to the flexibility approaches as contained in the status reports with a view towards further improving their participation and endeavouring to conclude agreement in the WTO in 1999; and ii by working constructively to achieve critical mass in the WTO necessary for concluding agreement in all 9 sectors. 16. This process of expanding participation beyond APEC will not prejudice the position of APEC members with respect to the agenda and modalities to be agreed at the Third WTO Ministerial Conference. 17. Ministers agreed to review progress at the Trade Ministerial Meeting in June 1999. 18. Elements in the other six sectors shall be further developed for review by Ministers Responsible for Trade in June 1999. Implementation of NTMs, facilitation and ECOTECH and other initiatives that have been agreed shall commence in accordance with the work programmes in each sector. 19. Impact of liberalisation: Ministers acknowledged the importance of promoting a broad-based and balanced understanding within APEC communities of the rationale for APEC's trade and investment liberalisation goals. Ministers noted that the case studies provide useful overview of the adjustment costs and benefits as well as the broader impact of liberalisation. Ministers tasked officials to develop effective communication strategies to build community understanding for liberalisation, including through the holding of a keynote seminar on communicating the impact of trade liberalisation in Auckland in June 1999. 20. Multilateral Trading System: Ministers reiterated their commitment to strengthen the multilateral trading system through further trade liberalisation and be ensuring the adequacy of trade rules, at a time of globalisation and rapid technological advancement, in a manner which will enhance the capacity of developing economies to integrate into the global economy and achieve the benefits of liberalisation. Ministers pledged their support for WTO's work on trade and investment liberalisation and rule making. In this regard, APEC member economies would actively participate and contribute to the WTO preparatory process to develop a substantive agenda for the Third WTO Ministerial Conference, with a view to pursing further broad-based multilateral market access and other liberalisation, to respond to the range of interests and concerns and of all members. Ministers also stressed the importance of full implementation of existing WTO commitments. Ministers also reaffirmed their commitment to maintain the momentum of multilateral trade liberalisation. Ministers encouraged acceleration of accession negotiations in accordance with WTO rules and based on effective market access commitments with a view to achieving universality of WTO membership. Ministers commended the on-going contribution by APEC to support work undertaken by the WTO in areas such as the interaction between trade and competition policy, transparency in government procurement and investment. In this respect, APEC work in such areas as competition policy, deregulation, government procurement and investment was of particular relevance. Ministers encouraged such work be continued. Ministers also directed that technical cooperation activities be enhanced to assist member economies to implement WTO Agreement. Economic and Technical Cooperation (ECOTECH) 21. Ministers commended the efforts to further strengthen economic and technical cooperation in APEC under the Manila Framework for Strengthening Economic Cooperation and Development. Capacity building initiatives which contribute towards reinforcing foundations for sustainable growth have become a priority in the light of the economic crisis. Ministers welcomed the SOM 1998 Report on ECOTECH Activities and called for the report to be submitted annually. Ministers expressed satisfaction with progress on the broad spectrum of ECOTECH activities in pursuit of the six priority themes, particularly the focus on capacity-building, and commended the efforts of the SOM Sub-committee on Economic and Technical Cooperation to improve coordination and management and ensure focussed outcomes. Ministers called for intensified work to further improve the effectiveness of economic and technical cooperation activities. 22. Developing Human Capital: Human resources development is a key factor for sustained economic growth and investments in human resources now will assist in economic recovery. Skills upgrading of the region's workforce will enhance the flexibility of economies to cope with the challenges in the new millennium. Ministers approved the Kuala Lumpur Action Programme on Skills Development to further intensify efforts towards upgrading the skills of the region's human capital and instructed APEC fora, particularly the HRD Working Group, to implement the Action Programme. Ministers welcomed the members' efforts to expand or initiate programmes for skills development following the Action Programme. Ministers recognised the importance of private sector contributions in skills development and welcomed the proposed seminar to share experiences on public-private/business sector partnership in skills development be held in 1999. Ministers encouraged greater contribution from the private sector in progressing the relevant projects of the HRD Working Group. Ministers recognised the importance of fully harnessing the vast potential of the human capital in the region, especially among youth and women, and reiterated their support for continued efforts to integrate them into APEC activities. Ministers endorsed all the recommendations of the Ministerial Meeting on Women in Economic Development in Cooperation in APEC, particularly the development of a Framework for the Integration of Women in APEC. Ministers noted the success of the APEC Youth Science Festival in Seoul in generating the involvement of youth in science and communication. 23. Stable, Safe and Efficient Capital Markets: Ministers noted the efforts to promote the development and resilience of APEC's financial and capital markets undertaken by APEC Finance Ministers. In tandem with this, efforts are being undertaken by member economies to reform and strengthen their domestic financial systems. Ministers agreed that APEC's approach towards accelerating an early recovery and restoring confidence in the region involved positive linkages and cooperation with the on-going efforts of the international financial institutions and other international fora to alleviate the crisis. Ministers noted that APEC fora have during the course of the year considered the impact of the financial crisis on labour markets, infrastructure development, SME, trade, investment, women, tourism and the energy sector. Members welcomed the report of the task force on human resources and the social impact of the financial crisis. 24. Economic Infrastructure: Ministers welcomed the APEC Infrastructure 1998 Report on activities to implement the 1997 Vancouver Framework for Enhanced Public-Private Partnerships In Infrastructure Development. Minsters recognised that investment in infrastructure development can contribute to economic recovery in the region and called for further progress in the five areas of: * creating an Asia-Pacific Information Society; * creating an Integrated Asia-Pacific Transportation System; * economically viable and environmentally sustainable energy infrastructure which includes the Natural Gas Initiative endorsed by Energy Ministers; * infrastructure for Sustainable Cities; and * infrastructure to Support Rural Integration and Diversification, including innovative ideas for financing rural infrastructure development. 25. Harnessing Technologies of the Future: In recognising the potential of scientific and technological advancements in promoting economic growth, Ministers endorsed the APEC Agenda for Science and Technology Industry Cooperation into the 21st Century approved by the Ministers Conference on Regional Science and Technology Cooperation. The 'Agenda' encourages enhanced collaboration and cooperation through the creation of strong open innovation systems and development of sustainable regional science and technology networks and partnerships. Ministers called for an annual progress report on implementation of the Agenda. Ministers also welcomed progress in the APEC cleaner production Initiative and encouraged member economies to actively participate in cleaner production projects. 26. Environmentally Sound Growth: Pursuant to the call by Leaders for an action-oriented report on the impact of population and economic growth on food, energy and the environment, Ministers welcomed and endorsed the 1998 FEEEP Report which outlines joint actions in the areas of food, energy and the environment, including the establishment of an interdisciplinary network of research institutions. Minsters instructed that work be progressed in 1999. Ministers endorsed the APEC Framework For Capacity Building Initiatives On Emergency Preparedness, which aims to strengthen joint cooperative efforts to enhance capacities of APEC member economies to respond to natural disasters and emergencies, and look forward to initiatives to improve preventive and responsive measures through information-sharing and capacity building. Ministers welcomed the decision of Energy Ministers to improve the efficiency of energy use, in particular through implementation of a voluntary pledge and review programme. Ministers reiterated the importance of APEC's work on sustainable development in following up on the initiatives of Environment Ministers in respect of clean oceans, cleaner production and sustainable cities, and directed the appropriate APEC fora to progress work in these areas. 27. Strengthening the dynamism of Small and Medium Enterprises: Ministers recognised the crucial role of small and medium enterprises (SMEs) in enhancing the resilience of economies in a rapidly evolving competitive business environment. Ministers welcomed the Integrated Plan of Action for SME (SPAN) approved by the SME Ministerial Meeting. The SPAN provides guidelines for the development of SMEs through action at the domestic level and collaboration efforts at the regional level. 28. Ministers also noted the work of the APEC Working Groups and other APEC fora in furthering APEC's objectives of promoting economic growth and cooperation. Ministers directed these fora to continue the implementation of the Framework for Strengthening Economic Cooperation and Development through coordinated activities. Electronic Commerce 29. Ministers endorsed the work of the APEC Electronic Commerce Task Force in promoting greater understanding of electronic commerce issues through exchanging and sharing of information and developing substantive recommendations to ensure that APEC as a region benefits from this new technology. This work programme covers Y2K, "Paperless Trading", authentication issues such as cross certification, collection of case studies, survey of impediments, "Virtual" Electronic Commerce/Multimedia Resource Network and ECOTECH activities. Ministers recognised that whilst the business sector has a leading role in the development of electronic commerce technology and applications, the government has an important role in providing a favourable environment for electronic commerce to flourish and to create confidence from using it. In order to increase the uptake of electronic commerce in APEC, Ministers endorsed the APEC Blueprint for Action on Electronic Commerce setting out the broad themes relating to cooperation on electronic commerce within APEC and specific future activities for the APEC-wide electronic commerce work programme and agreed that it be transmitted to APEC Economic Leaders for endorsement. They recognised that technical cooperation would enhance the capacity of member economies for the uptake of electronic commerce within APEC. To ensure continued coordination in pursuit of the Blueprint for Action, Ministers agreed that a Steering Group, comprising representatives from member economies would be established involving relevant working groups and sub-fora as well as business sector experts, in accordance with APEC guidelines on business/private sector participation. Ministers recognised the urgency to deal with the Y2K and welcomed the proposed Y2K Regional Contingency Planning Experts Meeting in early 1999. Ministers tasked official to collaborate to intensify regional preparations to deal with the Y2K problem. Ministers expressed appreciation to PECC for its contribution to APEC's work on electronic commerce. Analytical Work 30. Ministers welcomed and endorsed the Economic Committee's Annual Report, including the attached report of the Task Force on Food and the Infrastructure Workshop's Year-end Report. Ministers commended the Committee for its work in preparing the 1998 APEC Economic Outlook and the extensive progress made in finalising its initial research agenda. Ministers noted and endorsed the Economic Committee's revised terms of reference that focus the Committee's future endeavours on demand-driven analytical work in support of the Ministers and Leaders meetings as well the policy-oriented work of other APEC fora. Ministers also commended the Committee and its Task Force on Food for the work in developing the FEEEP Report to Leaders, the supporting analytical work on food and the Proceedings of the FEEEP Symposium, which addressed the crosscutting aspects of this issue. Ministers also commended the Infrastructure Workshop for advancing the work in this priority area. Including the results of the 1998 Public/Private-Sector Dialogue, which afforded the business sector an important opportunity to discuss the role of infrastructure investment in supporting recovery in growth. Management Process 31. Ministers welcomed the interim report on the three-year review of APEC's management process with a view to streamlining its work and making it coherent and lean so as to respond better to current challenges. The review collaboratively led by Malaysia, New Zealand and Brunei Darussalam is built upon the work done by the Task Force on Management Issues in 1997. Ministers endorsed a set of common guidelines to be used in reviewing the mandates of APEC fora and directed Senior Officials to forward their recommendations to Ministers in September 1999. In order to demonstrate their resolve to reform APEC's management process, Ministers agreed on the following initial actions: * dissolution of the Trade and Investment Data and Review Working Group (TIDWG) and Small Group on Information Gathering and Analysis; * adoption of common review guidelines for self-review by APEC fora; * moratorium on the creation of new fora during the review period. If necessary, only ad hoc task forces with a definite life span would be created; and * redesignating the Budget and Administrative Committee (BAC) as the Budget and Management Committee (BMC). Private Sector/Business Participation 32. Ministers held a dialogue with representatives of ABAC and encouraged greater interaction with the business/private sector in APEC activities. Ministers noted the positive response to ABAC's 1997 recommendations in APEC's Individual and Collective Action Plans. Organisational and Budget Issues 33. Ministers noted: * Outcomes of the Sectoral Ministerial Meetings on Finances; Trade; SMEs; Telecommunications an Information Industry; Energy; and Science and Technology; * Report of the APEC Study Centres; and * Statements of ASEAN Secretariat, PECC and South Pacific Forum. 34. Ministers endorsed the SOM Chair Report on Budget Issues and approved the 1999 budget of US$6,811,559 and contribution of member economies amounting to US$3,338,000. 35. Ministers took note of the Report of the APEC Secretariat and expressed appreciation for the work done by the Executive-Director, Ambassador Dato' Noor Adlan Yahaya Uddin and staff of the APEC Secretariat, as well as for the high level of professionalism and support provided to the APEC Committees and Working Groups and the APEC process as a whole. Future Meetings 36. Ministers thanked New Zealand for the briefing on the preparations for the 11th APEC Ministerial Meeting and looked forward to their next meeting in Auckland in 1999. Ministers also thanked Brunei Darussalam for its update on plans for the 12th Ministerial Meeting. The 13th Meeting will be hosted by the People's Republic of China. Ministers welcomed Mexico's offer to host the 14th Ministerial Meeting in 2002. * Australia; Brunei; Canada; People's Republic of China; Hong Kong, China; Indonesia; Japan; Korea; Malaysia; New Zealand; Papua New Guinea; Philippines; Singapore; Chinese Taipei; Thailand and USA From gattwd at corso.ch.planet.gen.nz Mon Nov 23 12:43:47 1998 From: gattwd at corso.ch.planet.gen.nz (Gatt Watchdog) Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1998 15:43:47 +1200 Subject: [asia-apec 913] More NZ Govt APEC hype Message-ID: If anyone knows which Spice Girl NZ Foreign Affairs Minister Don McKinnon really really wants to be, please let us know! APEC - Adding Spice to New Zealand's Future By Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade the Rt Hon Don McKinnon Although it will probably be the largest single event New Zealand has ever hosted, few Kiwis know what APEC is, let alone the face that it is this country's turn to host it in 1999. Many New Zealanders may think Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation has less relevance to them than the Spice Girls. And, unfortunately, many New Zealanders are probably far more interested in knowing why Ginger Spice has left the group than how APEC can make a real difference to their lives. APEC is an unusual beast in that it is more a process than an organisation. In short, it is the primary regional process for promoting open trade and economic cooperation. It is a consultative process which involves all Asia-Pacific's major economies and, therefore, some of the most influential leaders in the world. It was started in Canberra in 1989 as an informal dialogue group responding to the growing interdependence of Asia-Pacific economies. In 1993, in Seattle, it began to gain status when all the member economies' leaders gathered and they decided that APEC would be about "stability, security and prosperity for our peoples". The following year, in Bogor, Indonesia, the leaders agreed to the ambitious target of free and open trade and investment in the region by 2010 for developed economies and 2020 for developing economies. At subsequent meetings, action plans were developed to progress that goal. APEC is open and voluntary with everything done by peer pressure rather than treaties and laws. Also, unlike many other international organisations, APEC has direct private sector involvement. It deals with tariff/non-tariff measures, customs, standards and conformance, competition and deregulation. It covers many areas, including small and medium-sized enterprises, telecommunications, sustainable development, women, human resources development, fisheries and forestry. APEC helps open markets and believes in positive intervention in the marketplace by helping to build them. In New Zealand's year - 1999 - there will be 21 member economies including, for the first time, Russia, Peru and Viet Nam. Such is the importance of APEC that it is the only international forum where the three Chinas - the Peoples' Republic, Hong Kong and Chinese Taipei - sit around the same table. To put APEC in perspective, it is important to note that it accounts for 42 percent of the world's population, 57 percent of the world's economy and 46 percent of the world's merchandise trade. From New Zealand's point of view, it should be noted that 70 percent of our two-way trade, 70 percent of our 1.5 million tourists and 80 percent of our investment is from APEC economies. It is easy to see, then, the benefits that New Zealand can derive from further opening up those Asia-Pacific markets. APEC conservatively estimates the benefits of the first action plans at around half a percent growth in the region's economy. In dollar terms, that is equivalent to nearly $US 70 billion - or about the same size as the total New Zealand economy. The evidence also shows that those who liberalise the most gain the most. In this regard, New Zealand is a stand-out performer. Our gains are estimated at 1.3 percent of GDP and exports about four percent higher each year than they would have otherwise been. A study by the Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics shows that under APEC's policy of open regionalism, New Zealand stands to add 1.6 percent to its GDP and annual export volumes are likely to be about seven percent higher than would otherwise be the case. But one of the most interesting areas for New Zealand will come as a result of an initiative at last November's APEC meeting in Vancouver. There, the leaders agreed to liberalise 15 sectors of the regional economy (called Early Voluntary Sector Liberalisation, or EVSL) in advance of the original 2010/2020 deadline for free trade and investment in the region. APEC Trade Ministers will meet in Malaysia this month to hopefully finalise detailed work programmes in nine of those areas. Two of them, fisheries and forestry are of particular importance to New Zealand. Our exports of fish and forest products to the APEC region are already worth more than $3 billion a year and the current proposals to liberalise trade in these areas would mean tariff savings alone to New Zealand of $31.8 million and $36.2 million a year respectively. The timetable for tariff removal on fish products is by the year 2005 and for forestry products, which includes paper, by the year 2004. Removal of non-tariff measures will also enhance market access in places such as Japan. Assuming a modest tariff equivalent of 20 percent in the Japanese market, the removal of non-tariff measures will benefit the fisheries and forestry industries of New Zealand by about $74 million a year. A conservative estimate of the total value of sectoral liberalisation - the removal of tariff and non-tariff measures - in fisheries and forestry would be about $130 million a year for New Zealand. That is $130 million in increased profits, increased numbers of jobs and increased reinvestment for New Zealand. As good as that is, the impact of APEC doesn't stop at liberalisation. APEC also encompasses economic and technical cooperation measures which are designed to build markets and capacity in a sustainable manner so the benefits of liberalisation can be maximised without putting more pressure on the environment. Another important area of work for APEC is trade facilitation - removing or reducing transaction costs through simplifying regulatory structures. It is about reducing the costly and time-consuming red tape and paper work, the practical things, like reducing the number of customs forms our exporters have to fill out. It has been estimated that the average international trade transaction today requires 27 to 30 different parties, 40 documents, 200 data elements (30 or which are repeated at least 30 times) and the re-keying of 60 to 70 percent of all data at least once. This red tape and paper work accounts for 7 and 10 percent of the total value of world trade. By eliminating unnecessary administrative burdens small and medium-sized enterprises - the backbone of the New Zealand economy - will get a decent crack at export markets. From rverzola at phil.gn.apc.org Mon Nov 23 11:05:19 1998 From: rverzola at phil.gn.apc.org (Roberto Verzola) Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1998 11:05:19 Subject: [asia-apec 914] the worst is yet to come Message-ID: <199811240335.LAA01042@phil.gn.apc.org> M-bombs and Millennarians by Roberto Verzola Sept. 18, 1998 Philippine Journal The chorus of rosy scenarios is unbelievable. Economist Bernardo Villegas forecasts a 2% GNP increase in 1998 and an "even bigger increase in 1999." Then comes the IMF, which sees a GNP growth of 4% in 1999. The World Bank follows suit, predicting 3% growth in 1999 and 5% in the year 2000. President Estrada's economic advisers, according to the news, project an even rosier scenario. Hello? Are we living on the same planet? Here is a totally different scenario. If you are now making plans for the future, I urge you to consider this scenario carefully before you set any plans into motion: The financial and industrial centers of the world will be confronting in a year or two a crisis so serious that it can sink the world into a recession and worse. The coming economic and financial turmoil can also bring down with it those developing countries who delay putting up the protective walls that more enlightened Asian leaders are hastily setting up. At least four factors point towards this looming economic and financial crisis, the likes of which our generation has never seen: * The world's financial system today is already extremely shaky. Every currency devaluation in one country or stock market plunge in another threatens a new round of collapse in other countries. One tremor after another is threatening the weakened foundations of the system. It has become quite clear, from the way minor financial tremors in one corner of the globe trigger more tremors elsewhere, that international finance is showing the symptoms of a badly-designed system edging towards breakdown and failure. From the vantage point of systems design, the cause of this instability is glaringly obvious: its designers had committed the fatal mistake of putting efficiency over reliability, refusing to implement modularization, and relying on global instead of local factors. * At the turn of the millennium, major disruptions will occur in all financial and industrial centers of the world, triggered by the millennium bomb, also known as the Year 2000 (Y2K) bug. The M-bomb will hit the economies which are most automated the hardest. The ensuing confusion and turmoil can lead to breakdowns in basic services. US computer experts, for instance, are painting worst-case scenarios that include food riots, bank runs and widespread financial collapse. If you are looking for The Big One, here it is: millions of pieces of automated equipment in the very heart of industrial society, failing and causing near-paralysis at the same time. Today's isolated, occasional financial tremors--which are bad enough--will be nothing, compared to the tremendous impact of simultaneous widespread foreshocks, jolts and aftershocks that will hit every financial and industrial center in the world as a result of the M-bomb. We may not be as hard-hit from the direct impact of the M-bomb, but its financial and economic fallout will be all over us. * We all know exactly when the M-bomb will go off. The tension and mass anxiety as everybody anticipates the impact of the turmoil will build up in 1999 and can easily lead to hysteria and panic. It is a most unfortunate coincidence that the end of the millennium is also a period of renewed activity by millennarian movements and doomsday cults. Their apocalyptic messages and the public's justified anxiety over the M-bomb will tend to reinforce each other. Thus, at a period when the financial system badly needs public confidence to survive the crisis, such confidence will probably by at its lowest. * The ecological crises caused by corporate deforestation, large-scale mining, land conversions and other forms of nature-abuse are now coming to a head, it seems. Consider two news items, hidden in the inside pages of most newspapers: 1) we are now supposedly in the middle of the rainy season, but the waters of the Angat and other dams that supply Metro Manila are still way below normal; and 2) Indonesia, traditionally a rice exporter, will be importing rice next year. Thus, the year 1999 threatens us with a water crisis more serious than this year's, as well as a potential rice crisis as more populous Indonesia competes with other rice-importing countries for dwindling supplies in the international rice market. Each one of these four factors is problem enough. Together, the quadruple combination of a worsening financial crisis, the economic turmoil triggered by the M-bomb, an impending water and rice crisis, and hair-trigger public responses sharpened by turn-of-the-millennium anxiety comprise a truly explosive mix. We are definitely in for a supertyphoon. Instead of bringing out the picnic basket, as economists wearing rose-tinted glasses advise, we should close our doors and windows tightly, as our neighbors have started doing. From pspd at soback.kornet.nm.kr Mon Nov 23 14:35:28 1998 From: pspd at soback.kornet.nm.kr (PSPD) Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1998 14:35:28 +0900 Subject: [asia-apec 915] Korea conference Prgraam and info References: Message-ID: <3658F41F.F390C4C8@soback.kornet.nm.kr> International Conference on the Social Responsibility of Korean Companies Abroad: Human Righrs, Labor and the Environment Since 1995, Korean House for International Solidarity (KHIS) - a independent center of People's Solidarity for Participatory Democracy (PSPI) has been monitoring the actions of Korean companies abroad that have violated labor and human rights. Every year KHIS has written letters of appeal to companies, conducted field research - fact finding - in China, Vietnam and Indonesia, and organized seminars and street campaigns to raise public awareness of corporate violations. Recently, KHIS began organizing a street campaign every weekend to promote writing protest postcards as well as collecting small funds for workers who have been illegally dismissed since the summer of 1998. Many students and young people in particular are interested in and support this campaign. This is because name brands such as Nike, Reebok and Adidas are popular with this demographic group, and because these companies tend to violate the labor rights of youth, children and women (Violations include low-wages and unsafe working conditions, among others). Many of these name brand companies subcontract to Korean companies from Indonesia, China, Vietnam, Sri Lanka and Central America. KHIS has organised an international conference every two years on the independent monitoring of Korean companies abroad. This year's conference will be held on December 12-13 at Sokang University in Seoul, Korea. Various social organizations are scheduled to participate including trade unions, labour and human rights groups and different social interest groups including those concerned with the rights of women, citizens, youth and consumers. During the conference, host organizations will address NGOs codes of conduct against companies codes of conduct and action program in the each area like woman, labour union, environmental group, youth group and independent monitoring system. Also we will invite workers from shoe and clothing companies who worked from TNCs like Nike and Carfu and Sony. An important part of this conference is the Cultural Event and Solidarity program with Asian trainees who work in Korean companies abroad. It is an opportunity for conference participants to share their experiences, culture, food, etc. The event will also be a space to discuss building a network to monitor Korean companies abroad in the Asian region. Attached is a conference program and a PSPD brochure. sincerely yours Chief Coordinator of KHIS in PSPD Serapina Cha, Mi-kyung 1. Conference Goals ? Evaluate the monitoring of Korean companies abroad and discussion of how to raise the social responsibilities of companies ? Create a declaration and campaign for fair trade and human rights companies ? Prepare a domestic network for human rights and green consumerism ? Publicize ways to conduct education for youth ? Create a network of southeast and east Asian laborers working in Korean companies abroad ? Develop codes of conduct and independent monitoring 2. Program Schedule December 12(Sat.) : 9:30 : Opening ceremony 10:00- 11:10 : Presentation of 98' Field Research Reports(in Vietnam, China, and Indonesia) - 20min. per each Chairperson : Shin, Yoon-Hwan Debaters : 3 field researchers and representative from Labour Dept and . companies 11:10- 11:30 : Presentation of an Indonesian participant (a labor in a Korean company) 11:30- 11:50 : Showing a video (the record of interviews or investigation into Nike or Korean clothing companies in Central and Latin America ) 11:55- 12:50 : Discussion and general review 1:00- 2:00 : Lunch 2:00- 2:40 : Presentation of case study of foreign firms(or TNCs) 1) Carufu Korea 2) Sony Korea 3) City Back in Korea 2:40- 3:00 : Presentation of monitoring activities to foreign firms(or TNCs) in Japan 3:00- 3:20 : Break 3:20- 4:20 : Direction and correspondence to labor-management disputes in foreign firms(or TNCs) Chairman : Cha, Mi-Kyung or Kang Soo- dol Debaters : Daewoo Association of Trade Unions, Hyundai Association of Trade Unions, Federation of Commercial Trade Unions in Korea. FIET. 4:30 - 5:30 Report on proceeding with adoption of companies codes of conduc Chairman : Not yet confrimed Debaters : PSPD, FKTU , TNCs Japan, Korea Women Life Association. December 13(Sun.) 9:00 Briefing session 9:30- 9:50 : Presentation of case study - the actual condition of women's rights at Nike and multinational shoe companies 9:50- 10:20 : Presentation of case study abroad - a representative of Clean Clothes Campaign in Holland for women's labor rights at subcontracted shoe?clothing companies of multinational brand names 10:30-11:15 : Public campaign to promote the responsibility of companies - focusing on women's, consumers', youth's and children's rights Chairman : Lee, Jung-Ock Debaters ; representative from the youth, women gourps, KHIS, Pusan Huma rights Center and CCC. 1:15- 11:50 : Presentation of counter plan and case study of environmental and vital problems caused by foreign investment of companies in Malaysia and Indonesia 12:00- 1:00 : Lunch 1:10- 1:40 : Environmental problems related to shipbreaking industries in Sebu island, in Philippines (Showing slides and presentation of case study) 1:45-2:30 : Regulations of environment and monitoring companies Chairman : Dr. Jung soo-bok Debaters : KEFM, Green Korea, LifeNet, Environment Committee in the govt, Environmental lawyer in Philippines 2:30-3:30 : Evaluation - announcement of standpoints of monitoring companies for the realization of companies codes of conduct, and active plans for future Chairman : Dr Chae Soo-il (Director of KHIS) Labor : Daewoo Assoication of Trade Unions and Hyundai Assolication of Trade Unions. - internal and external solidarity proposing companies codes of conduct Women : Korean Women' life , Christian Women Committee, Maters Network in PSPD - women's?children's rights Environment?life ; standpoint of continuously possible development and the preservation of environment and life Youth : establishing standpoints for prohibition from stealing youth labor forces and protection of youth's rights Human right : PSPD and groups related to the human right - declaration of internal and external solidarity to protect both human right and labor right against the Globalization 4:00- 6:00 : Cultural Night with foreign trainee of the Asian investment regions, staying in Korea Opening ceremony- Cultral groups from PSPD and Singers form KEFM. Speech for solidarity Speeches for solidarity of 3 countries(Philippines, China, Indonesia) and presentation of a labor about lifes in Korea Showing fairs(?) of participants from each country Recitation of proclamation of solidarity 6:00- 8:00 : reception KHIS Tel : 822-723-4255 Fex : 822-723-5055 e-mail: pspd@soback.kornet.nm.kr cc: Host organization of conference will be consisted by about 15 groups from civic, human rights, trade union, women, environmental groups, youth and consumer groups. From ppc at philonline.com Tue Nov 24 09:49:55 1998 From: ppc at philonline.com (ppc) Date: Tue, 24 Nov 1998 08:49:55 +0800 Subject: [asia-apec 916] Resolution on US-Japan Militrist Agenda Message-ID: <199811240049.IAA08008@fiesta.philonline.com.ph> DECLARATION of the ROUNDTABLE DISCUSSION on US-JAPAN MILITARIST AGENDA in the ASIA-PACIFIC Co-sponsored by BAYAN-Philippines and Asia-wide Campaign at the Asia-Pacific People's Assembly, Kuala lumpur, Malaysia 12 November 1998 Globalization, trumpeted as the inexorable integration of the vastly disparate economies of the advanced capitalist countries and the backward, pre-industrial Third World nations into a single prosperous world economy, has unraveled and become exposed as a false messiah. Instead, the policies of liberalization, deregulation and privatization are now widely seen as delivering deathblows to the crisis-ridden economies of underdeveloped countries and the so-called newly industrializing countries (NICs). The results for oppressed peoples are plain to see: workers thrown out of their jobs or forced to accept slave wages and myriad flexibilization schemes; peasants and indigenous peoples displaced from their land and driven to extreme poverty by "development projects" and export-driven land conversions; massive migration of rural poor to cities only to become jobless slum dwellers; the commerce of women and children in sweat shops and burgeoning sex trade; the exploitation and abuse of migrant labor; bankruptcies of domestic enterprises and entire economies. Working people in industrialized countries are not spared as international capital seeks to invest and set up shop where labor costs are the lowest and trade unions are crushed, coopted or non-existent. Resurgent mass protests, uprisings, national liberation struggles and generalized unrest are the peoples' response to severe economic hardships brought about by the neoliberal policies of imperialist globalization. In the Asia-Pacific, the US and its junior partner, Japan, have been most active in pushing globalization to the dominated countries and peoples. They unite in coercing the latter to comply with GATT-WTO, IMF-World Bank and APEC and other regional economic bloc impositions, with the collusion of subservient states and their ruling elites, in order to open the door wide open to corporate plunder by monstrous TNCs. The current financial and economic crisis which saw the crash of East Asian economies including that of Japan, the collapse of the Russian economy, the floundering of the Chinese and Latin American economies, and now threatening to backlash on the US and EU economies, only underscores the urgency for the US and Japan to secure their immense interests in the region. In order to to protect these interests and to suppress peoples' movements challenging them, the US and Japan flex their military might and intervene covertly and overtly in the internal affairs of countries in the region. Despite being the sole superpower in the world today, the US maintains 100,000 forward deployed troops in main military bases and facilities concentrated in South Korea and Okinawa islands. Post-World War II military treaties concluded by the US with Japan, South Korea, the Philippines, Thailand and others are the cornerstone of US hegemony in the region. Other Asian countries without US bases are covered by Accessing and Cross Servicing Agreements (ACSA) which provide unhampered sea/air ports usage and supply arrangements. The US and Japan have strengthened their strategic security alliance and stepped up their joint military activities. Building on the basis of the 1952 US-Japan Security Alliance, the two governments issued in 1996 the Joint Declaration on Security Alliance and followed this in 1997 with the New Guidelines for US-Japan Defense Security Cooperation. It can no longer be denied: Japanese militarism is being revived in conjunction with US domination of the Asia-Pacific. The New Guidelines enable the US and Japanese military to conduct joint operations not only for the "defense of Japan" but also in case of "emergencies in areas surrounding Japan," like the Korean peninsula, the Taiwan straits, and other flashpoints in the region. It extends the scope of operations of the Japanese Self-Defense Forces all the way to the Indian Ocean, Middle East and East Africa. As a concrete example, in May this year, when the Indonesian people rose up to overthrow the Suharto dictatorship, the New Guidelines were implemented. US Marines in Okinawa island were dispatched and waited off the Indonesian coast to intervene if the pro-imperialist government should collapse. The Japanese government mobilized Air Self-Defense Forces and the Maritime Safety Agency. The US is currently applying intense political and economic pressure on the Philippine government to immediately ratify a Philippine-US visiting forces agreement or VFA in the wake of the dismantling of US bases there in 1991. This one-sided, onerous and deceptive agreement seeks to re-establish US military presence in the Philippines and Southeast Asian region. The Korean peninsula continues to be divided between North and South as the Korean War has not ended since only a fragile truce and not a peace treaty exists between the protagonists. Meanwhile the US' saber rattling against North Korea is undermining the people's demand for peaceful reunifiction and destabilizing the entire Asia-Pacific region. In Indonesia, the US is actively intervening to ensure a post-Suharto and Habibie pro-US regime which allows for civilian rule but under which the dreaded US-trained and armed ABRI or Indonesian Armed forces retains its "dual function in security and politics." This means ABRI keeps its vast apparatus of repression and is rendered immune to being held accountable for gross human rights violations such as the slaughter of half a million Indonesians when Suharto seized state power in 1965 and the extermination of one-third of the East Timorese people with the forcible annexation of East Timor. Peace-loving peoples of the Asia-Pacific must condemn the US military hegemony in Asia-Pacific, Japan's growing militarism and the US-Japan military alliance. To frustrate imperialist attacks against militant peoples' movements and the outbreak of US and Japan wars of aggression in the region, we must strengthen our own struggles as well as international solidarity in order to realize the following: 1) abrogation of all US military agreements and treaties specially the US-Japan Security Treaty and Defense Cooperation Guidelines; 2) junking of the proposed RP-US Visiting Forces Agreement; 3) removal of US military bases in the Asia-Pacific region, in particular Okinawa, Japan and South Korea; 4) conclusion of a peace treaty to end the cease-fire status between North Korea and the US and promote the peaceful and independent reunification of Korea; 5) abrogation of the Taiwan Relations Act to prevent US intervention in the Taiwan Strait and promote peaceful relations and the reunification process of Taiwan and mainland China. 6) dismantling of the ?dual function? of the US-trained and armed Indonesian Armed Forces and making them accountable for gross human rights violations. From rreid at actrix.gen.nz Wed Nov 25 07:37:37 1998 From: rreid at actrix.gen.nz (Robert Reid) Date: Wed, 25 Nov 1998 11:37:37 +1300 Subject: [asia-apec 917] Re: ACTION ALERT; TIAN CHUA Message-ID: <199811242242.LAA17093@mail.actrix.gen.nz> ASIA PACIFIC WORKERS SOLIDARITY LINKS ACTION ALERT ACTION ALERT ACTION ALERT ACTION ALERT ACTION ALERT ACTION ALERT 24 November 1998 TIAN CHUA ARRESTED FOR SECOND TIME IN MALAYSIA Labour, human rights and political activist Tian Chua was arrested with three others in Kuala Lumpur late on Saturday night 21 November. His arrest followed the police break-up of the traditional Saturday night "reformasi" demonstration. However Tian Chua was not arrested at this demonstration. This is the second arrest for Tian Chua over the last two months. He was arrested, detained and beaten for one night on Monday 28 September. Tian is coordinator of the Labour Resource Centre in Kuala Lumpur and a member of the human rights group SUARAM. He is Chairperson of the Coalition for Peoples Democracy. Tian Chua was one of the main organisers of the Asia Pacific Peoples Assembly that was held in Kuala Lumpur prior to the APEC Ministerial and Leaders meetings. Tian was spokesperson for the anti-globalisation demonstration that was held by APPA participants on Sunday 15 November. On 16 November, he appeared on the local Dateline television show with New Zealand Trade Unionist Robert Reid criticising the APEC agenda. Later that night the pair were harassed, photographed and videoed by police as they stood outside the Putra World Trade Centre where the APEC Business Summit gala dinner was being held. On 17 November Tian went to Bangkok for a few days as a trainer at a seminar organised by the International Chemical Energy, Mining and General Workers Federation (ICEM). He returned to KL later in the week. Unlike his first arrest where he was detained for one night, as of today Tian is still being held under detention. Workers at SUARAM believe that he may still be held for seven days when charges will have to be laid. Malaysian opposition parties and peoples organisations were always worried about a crack-down by the Mahathir Government following the completion of the APEC Summit. Their concern was raised further following the attack of US Vice President Al Gore on the Malaysian Government prior to the APEC Summit. The feeling was very much "with friends like Gore who needs enemies." The comments of Al Gore has enabled Mahathir to brand all those seeking political reform as anti-nationalist and pro-US or pro-CIA. People such as opposition politician and lawyer Karpal Sing, SUARAM spokesperson Elizabeth Wong, Peoples Party leader Dr Syed Husin Ali, Islamic Party editor Zulkifli Sulong and noted Professor Chandra Muzaffar have all expressed their concern at the negative impact that the Gore remarks will have on the movement for reform. Please send messages demanding the release of Tian Chua and the others arrested on 21 November to the Malaysian Government and police. Please mention in your letters that Tian is a well known opponent of free trade and US foreign policy. Please address your letters to: 1. Datuk Seri Dr Mahathir Mohamad Prime Minister of Malaysia Jalan Dato Onn 50502 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia Fax: +60-3-298 4172 / +60-3-238 3784 2. Datuk Mokhtar Abdullah Attorney-General of Malaysia Jabatan Peguam Negara Malaysia Tingkat 20, Bangunan Bank Negara Malaysia, Jalan Tangsi Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia Fax: +60-3-298 4172 3. Tan Sri Rahim Noor Inspector-General of Police Ibu Pejabat Polis Persekutuan Bukit Aman Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia Fax: +60-3-291 0707 Please also send deputations or protest letters to your nearest Malaysian embassy or consulate. We would be grateful if you could also send copies of your letters to SUARAM at suaram@geocities.com Asia Pacific Workers Solidarity Links (APWSL) P.O. Box 11-123, Wellington, New Zealand Tel / Fax: 64-4-389 5399 E-mail: From tpl at cheerful.com Wed Nov 25 09:56:15 1998 From: tpl at cheerful.com (GABRIELA) Date: Wed, 25 Nov 1998 08:56:15 +0800 Subject: [asia-apec 918] Statement of Solidarity For Tian Chua and Against Political Repression in Malaysia Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.19981125085615.006b1520@pop.skyinet.net> >Date: Tue, 24 Nov 1998 19:46:11 +0800 >From: BAYAN > >Statement of Solidarity >For Tian Chua and Against Political >Repression in Malaysia > > > We, the Filipino delegates to the Asia Pacific Peoples' Assembly (APPA), >strongly condemn the recent arrest and detention of Mr. Tian Chua by >Malaysian police after a protest action held last November 21 at Kampung >Baru, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. > > We met and got to know Mr. Tian Chua as a member of the APPA secretariat >and one of the leaders of the Coalition for People's Democracy(CPD), >SUARAM and the Labor Resource Center (LRC). > > Mr. Tian Chua's arrest and the violent dispersal of protest actions >manifest the Malaysian government's total disregard of the people's >democratic right to peaceful assembly and free expression. The events last >Saturday also reveal that Prime Minister Mahathir's iron fist rule can no >longer suppress the growing movement for democracy and social reforms in >Malaysia. > > There is no credibility in the statement of Malaysian Information Minister Mohamed Rahmat that foreign elements are behind the protest movement. The continuing mass demonstrations provide clear evidence of widespread >discontent over the economic crisis brought about by neo-liberal policies >packaged as globalization. > > From November 7-15, we were witness to the Malaysian peoples' outright >rejection of Prime Minister Mahathir's strongman rule. Together with 636 >participants representing 316 organizations in 30 countries, we assailed >the continuing onslaught of imperialist globalization on the rights and >livelihood of the peoples, as implemented by subservient third world >governments. > > Policies of foreign exchange and capital controls being carried out by the Mahathir regime, while giving it a semblance of independence from IMF-WB >dictates, is not reversing the fundamental neo-liberal policies of >liberalization, deregulation, and privatization in the rest of the >Malaysian economy. This is why the economic crisis in Malaysia continues. > > The working peoples of the developed and developing countries suffer the >brunt of the economic crisis in the name of globlization and our rights are >continuously being suppressed in the name of "peace and order" and >"harmony". > > We unite with the oppressed and exploited peoples of the world in the >struggle against the common attack on our lives and the assault against our >rights by foreign monopoly capitalists , local ruling elites, and >reactionary governments. > > In the spirit of solidarity, we join our Malaysian brothers and sisters in demanding for: > > 1. The immediate and unconditional release of Mr. Tian Chua; > 2. Respect for the right to free expression and peaceful assembly and a >stop to political repression in Malaysia; > 3. An investigation of increasing police brutality in Malaysia; > 4. Freedom for all political prisoners in Malaysia; > 5. The repeal of Malaysia's Internal Security Act (ISA); > 6. Respect for the right to due process and a fair trial. > >SIGNED: > > BAYAN(New Patriotic Alliance) : Dr. Carol Araullo > Rita Baua > KMP(Peasant Movement in the Philippines) : Rafael Mariano > Lualhati Baylosis > KMK(National Movement of Women Workers): Nenita Miranda > GABRIELA (National Alliance of Women's Organization): Elisa Tita Lubi > GABRIELA-Youth : Maricel Gavina > AMIHAN (National Movement of Peasant Women): Teresita Oliveros > Catarina Estavillo > PAMALAKAYA(National Federation of Fisherfolk) : Rudy Sambajon > Cesar Arellano > KARAPATAN(Alliance for the Advancement of People's Rights) : Benjie Oliveros, Jr. > MIGRANTE-International : Imelda Laguindam > Joshue Loyola > LFS (League of Filipino Students) : Aaron Ceradoy > >Note: Today, November 25, BAYAN and its member organizations will be >holding a protest picket in front of the Malaysian Embassy. The >signatory Philippine delegates to APPA will be attending said mass action. > > > --------------------------------------------------------- > 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 amittal at foodfirst.org Wed Nov 25 08:40:43 1998 From: amittal at foodfirst.org (Anuradha Mittal) Date: Tue, 24 Nov 1998 15:40:43 -0800 Subject: [asia-apec 919] The Politics of Food --Food First on Talk of the Nation and Making Contact Message-ID: Anuradha Mittal, Policy Director at Food First/Institute for Food and Development Policy will be on Talk of the Nation tomorrow, Nov. 25, at 11.00 am (PST). The program will cover issues around hunger and poverty in the US. Other guests will include Robert Rector from the Heritage Foundation, author of the Myth of American Poverty. This is a call in show--we hope anti hunger and anti poverty activists around the country will call in with their questions. ************************************************************************* ALSO "THE POLITICS OF FOOD" -- that's the title of Making Contact's next program to be fed Wednesday, November 25, 1998. December marks the 50th anniversary of the signing of the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights. This document guarantees, among other things, the right to food, housing and medical care. It also grants the right to work and fair pay. But here in the United States, millions of poor people go without these basic necessities...and poverty activists are building a movement to call on U.S. officials to recognize economic human rights. On this program, we'll have a report from the first annual Poor People's Summit held in Philadelphia. We'll also talk with an expert on hunger and poverty who says that food is plentiful in the world; it's political decisions that keep it away from those who need it most. * Peter Rosset, executive director of the Institute for Food and Development Policy (Food First), says that "hunger is actually due to human decisions and to policies that are very much influenced by multinational corporations and the powers-that-be to benefit their own interests." * And, correspondent Travis Lea speaks with poverty activists at the first annual Poor People's Summit held in Philadelphia in October 1998. Footage includes Cheri Honkala, co- founder of the Kennsington Welfare Rights Union, who calls for an end to poverty in the United States: "We will no longer tolerate the injustice of economic human rights violations." Making Contact, a 29-minute public-affairs program fed on the satellite each Wednesday at 12 noon ET, is available free of charge to all public radio stations. For further information, please call the National Radio Project at (510)251-1332 or (650)851-7256. email: contact@igc.org Internet: http://www.igc.apc.org/MakingContact National Producer, David Barsamian; Managing Producer, Phillip Babich; Senior Advisor, Norman Solomon; Executive Director: Peggy Law; Production Assistant: Shereen Meraji Anuradha Mittal Policy Director Institute for Food and Development Policy - Food First 398 60th Street, Oakland, CA 94618 Phone: (510) 654-4400 Fax: (510) 654-4551 http://www.foodfirst.org From rreid at actrix.gen.nz Thu Nov 26 06:31:06 1998 From: rreid at actrix.gen.nz (Robert Reid) Date: Thu, 26 Nov 1998 10:31:06 +1300 Subject: [asia-apec 920] ACTION ALERT UPDATE: TIAN CHUA Message-ID: <199811252135.KAA09484@mail.actrix.gen.nz> ASIA PACIFIC WORKERS SOLIDARITY LINKS ACTION ALERT UPDATE ACTION ALERT UPDATE 26 NOVEMBER 1998 ARREST OF TIAN CHUA AND TWO OTHERS IN KUALA LUMPUR Thank you to all those who have undertaken solidarity action in response to the arrest of Tian Chua and (we now understand) two others late on Saturday 21 November 1998. Please find below updates that have been prepared by the Malaysian Human Rights organisation, SUARAM. As you can see from their reports Tian has already been been beaten. Also he was not brought to Court within 24 hours of his arrest which is a requirement under Malaysian law. We urge you to continue to put pressure on the Malysian Government by writing letters, contacting your local Malaysian Embassy or Consul or asking the Foreign Ministry of your own country (with the exception of the USA) to take up with the Malaysian Government the matter of the arrest of Tian and the two others and the continuing use of the ISA in Malaysia. Further updates on the situation of Tian and the unfolding situation in Malaysia can be obtained from the SUARAM web site: http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Lobby/1577 Thanks Asia Pacific Workers Solidarity Links (APWSL) P.O. Box 11-123, Wellington, New Zealand Tel / Fax: 64-4-389 5399 E-mail: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------- URGENT APPEAL: What you can do for "Tian Chua and 2 others" case SUARAM is urging all NGOs and individuals to take immediate action on the arrest of Tian Chua and two others on Saturday 21st November at Kampung Baru. (Please refer to prvious postings for more deatils of the arrest) Tian Chua's present detention is viewed as arbitary and a form of political persecution. Furthermore, a dangerous precedent that is unlawful and unconstitutional has been set, where Tian and the others were kept for more than 24 hours without being brought to the Magistrate's Court until Monday 23rd November 1998. SUARAM urges you to protest and take immediate action by writing letters or faxing to the appropriate authorities. We also encourage other forms of peaceful protest. We suggest that you include the following demands among those others that you may like to make: ? To release all those arrested in the streets immediately, or charge them immediately; ? To ensure that there will be no political crackdown or persecution of supporters of the Reformation movement, opposition parties and NGO activists; ? To demand that the Malaysian government reaffirm its commitment to democratic principles by allowing people to freely and openly voice their opinions, especially those calling for more democracy and reforms; ? To immediately and unconditionally release all ISA detainees or charge them in court; ? To abolish the Internal Security Act; ? To condemn and urge for the immediate halt in excessive use of police force that has resulted only in violence. Please send your appeals to the following people: Datuk Seri Dr. Mahathir Mohammad Prime Minister's Department Jalan Dato Onn 50502 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Fax: 60-3-2984172, 2383784 Tan Sri Rahim Noor, Inspector-General of Police Ibu Pejabat Polis Persekutuan, Bukit Aman, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia Fax: 603-2910707 OCPD Zainal Abidin Ali Dang Wangi Police Station Jalan Stadium Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia Fax: 603-2023237 Please also send your letter of protest to Malaysia's diplomatic representative in your country. Please send copies of your letter to SUARAM office for our documentation. END ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------- SUARAM UPDATE: 26 November 1998 1. ISA Arrest - Mr. Zulkefli Othman has been confirmed to be detained under the Internal Security Act. 2. Remand of Tian Chua and two others. Tian Chua's lawyer, M. Puravalen, has put in an application for a revision of the magistrates decision, citing illegal detention (re: 24 hours dateline) among reasons, to High Court judge Patail. It was rejected (surprise!) and the lawyers vow to continue their appeal. Tian Chua was also taken to INSAN office and a search of his room was conducted and some documents were confiscated. One of SUARAM's staff was able to meet and converse with him. He was told by Tian Chua that the police have transferred him to another lock-up cell, away from others detained for alleged illegal gathering. He was also hit by a police officer on one side of his face this morning. The SUARAM staff was able to examine the insides of his mouth and found some cuts. Tian Chua's shirt collar was also spotted with dried blood. There was no evidence of bruising or swelling 3. SUARAM's concerns We are concerned that Tian Chua, aside from selectively persecuted, may face more bodily harm. This stems from one earlier police report which he made and described in detail how he was beaten up when he was first arrested on 24th September, 1998. (please check our website) We are also concerned that as soon as his remand is finished, he may be detained under the Internal Security Act. This has happened to at least 2 other men in the last few weeks. We urge you to take immediate action, so as to ensure the safety, well-being and the immediate release of Tian Chua, and the other detainees. We wish to thank all the numerous actions, letters, emails and faxes that we had received on behalf of Tian Chua. Especially those who had taken time to picket. Please keep the pressure up! We are touched by your solidarity and support, and together with all of you, we will see a better tomorrow in Malaysia. Thank you. In solidarity, Elizabeth Wong Coordinator SUARAM ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------- STATUTORY DECLARATION I, Wong Keat Ping, (Elizabeth) (K/P 700309-08-6306) of 11, Jalan 1A/71E, Jalan Carey, 46000 Petaling Jaya, Selangor, hereby solemnly and sincerely declare as follows: I met up with Mr. Chua Tian Chang (Chua) and Mr. Tang Siong Ying (Tang) along Jalan Raja Alang, near the 7-11 store at around 11:00 p.m. on the evening of Saturday Nov. 21st. We walked up Jalan Alang to the intersection of Jalan Raja Abdullah, that led us to a group of journalists and friends. It was close to the Kampung Baru mosque. When we arrived there, most of the journalists were getting ready to leave. I chatted with my housemate, Ms. Mages, and decided that I should go back together with her. I saw Chua, Tang and Michael Kourdeff from the Australian High Commission walk away. I yelled out to ask where they were going. One of them answered they would be back shortly. That was about 11:45 p.m. I sat on the ground and continued chatting with my friends when suddenly I saw Chua pushed and pulled by a group of men. I saw one of them holding and dragging him by his t-shirt collar. I walked towards Chua in order to find out what was happening. I heard Chua shouting, "Am I under arrest?" I was prevented from going near him by one man who pushed me. There was also a long-haired woman who grabbed my left arm. She screamed at me, "Go away, or they will arrest you." I was 2 metres from the police truck and Chua. From where I was standing, I saw several men half-dragging and shoving Chua into the police truck. By this time, Tang was next to me. I heard him asking a Chinese man to identify himself. The man answered, "Cheah". Both Tang and I asked him why he had detained Chua. He repeatedly answered, "Orders from my boss." I went back to my friends and sat on the ground. A couple of minutes later, a man beckoned me to him and gave me a bunch of car-keys. I looked up and Chua nodded to indicate that it belonged to me. I went forward a few steps and asked him where his car was. He yelled out something but it was inaudible. The police prevented me from going any closer to hear him. I went back to my corner again and sat on the ground once more. Some minutes later, I saw some journalists stir and looked towards the police truck. I got up and saw a man inside the police truck with his hands all over Chua. This grabbing went on for about a minute. I saw a white van, number plate WCV 1323 reversing towards the back of the police truck. A group of men surrounded Chua and proceeded to take him out of the truck and towards the side of the van. I moved to the other side of the van and the window was opened. I was positioned directly in front of the side door of the van, where I could see Chua. A man attempted to push me away from where I was standing. I heard Chua shouting, "Why are you punching me?". I was horrified to see a tall man, with a vest, punching Chua on the side of his right stomach. The other men held on to Chua and attempted to pushed him into the van. I saw a minor scuffle occur between the men and Chua. A man next to me said, "Nothing to see, nothing to see." I replied, "What do you mean nothing to see, that man just punched my friend!". He tried to push me away. By this time, Chua had already left in the van. A bespectacled man came up to me and said "Fuck you". I asked, "What was that?" He replied, "Nothing." And walked towards the police truck. I yelled out and said, "How dare you swear at me?" The man who was now about a metre away, shouted "Fuck you." He repeated it loudly several times. I saw there were at least a dozen men between me and the man who was swearing. None of them did anything. Again the woman tugged my arm. I yelled back, "Who are you? I don't take kindly to people swearing at me." Tang who was next to me now, asked "Who are you? Identify yourself." Tang pulled me aside. A man on my left side, came out, and yelled at that man, "Who are you? Gangster-ke?" Tang pulled me away. As there was nothing left to do, I left with Tang and Mike to check if Chua was brought to Jalan Stadium Dang Wangi police station. At the police station, I saw Chua, handcuffed and led to a building. I waited with several of his friends for a while. In time, I saw Chua taken into a police van and Tang went forward and spoke to him. I heard Tang ask Chua, if he had been beaten. I did not hear Chua's answer. Tang then shouted out to me, "Take down this name, Syed Fadil." And I make this solemn declaration conscientiously believing the same to be true and by virtue of the provisions of the Statutory Declaration Act 1960. Subscribed and solemnly declared by the abovenamed WONG Keat Ping (Elizabeth) ) At Kuala Lumpur in the state of ) Wilayah Persekutuan ) On 23rd, November 1998 ) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------- ABOLISH I.S.A.! MANSUHKAN I.S.A! SIGN JUST WORLD'S WHITE RIBBON / SIGNATURE CAMPAIGN FOR JUSTICE! http://www.jaring.my/just ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------- On the occasion of the 50th Anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, please urge our Malaysian government to ratify the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. SUARA RAKYAT MALAYSIA (SUARAM) struggling for human rights in Malaysia 11, Jalan 1A/71E, Jalan Carey, 46000 Petaling Jaya, Selangor, Malaysia tel: 60-3-794 3525 fax:60-3- 794 3526 email: suaram@geocities.com, wkpeng@pc.jaring.my website:http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Lobby/1577 From rverzola at phil.gn.apc.org Thu Nov 26 06:14:17 1998 From: rverzola at phil.gn.apc.org (Roberto Verzola) Date: Thu, 26 Nov 1998 06:14:17 Subject: [asia-apec 921] was this issue ever raised at APPA? Message-ID: <199811262310.HAA02482@phil.gn.apc.org> Was the millennium bug and how it would interact with the global financial crisis ever discussed at APPA? Roberto --------- Second Opinion Needed: strategies for survival by Roberto Verzola Philippine Journal Oct. 27, 1998 In my Sept. 15 column, I questioned the over-optimistic growth forecasts of NEDA and IMF economists for the coming years. I wrote that machine failures due to the Year 2000 software problem (also called the millennium bomb, or M-bomb) will instead lead to widespread disruptions in the technological infrastructure of the global financial and industrial system. Given the sensitivity of this system today even to minor tremors, the simultaneous jolts and shocks triggered by the M-bomb will lead to a major nosedive and even a possible crash of the crisis-ridden system. That column was based on a longer article entitled "The Millennium Bug: A Time Bomb in the Heart of Industrial Economies", which I had released earlier. It was published by the Journal as a four-part series on Oct. 19-22. I've come across two very recent articles on the M-bomb which confirm such a scenario. Popular Science on the M-bomb The first is an article by William Phillips on the Oct. 1998 issue of the Popular Science magazine, entitled "The Year 2000 problem: will the bug bite back?" Its "worst-case" M-bomb scenario: "Your credit card bill is suddenly 99 years overdue, you own another century's worth of interest on your home.... Phone lines are busy, and e-mail is down because the electricity is out. You're under a boil-water alert, and the shelves at the local supermarket are bare. And oh yeah--the money in your bank account disappears faster than it did last time you visited Las Vegas." The PS article adds that "major U.S. banks are well along" their software conversion efforts, but the small banks are "lagging". Ominously, however, it also reminds its readers to "keep copies of old financial statements--along with copies of credit card, investment, loan, and tax records--just in case." On the other hand, a computer consultant interviewed for the article is "preparing for the worst," because he expects "global chaos lasting as long as six months." Popular Science describes how computer consultant Bob Reinke is preparing: "he's stocking up on food and water, expects to be without electricity for days, maybe weeks, and plans to take much of his money out of the bank." Fortune on the M-bomb The second article is an interview with Ed Yardeni, chief economist for Deutsche Bank Securities, which appeared in Fortune Magazine, Oct. 12, 1998 issue. Like most who take a cursory look at the problem, Yardeni admits he initially underestimated its impact: "After several weeks, I concluded that there was a 30% chance this could cause a global recession as bad as the 1973 to 1974 downturn. Since then, I have raised the odds several times, most recently to 70%. I'd be delighted to back off, to learn that more progress has been made. But the way things are going, as we get closer to Jan. 1, 2000, I may raise the odds again." Here are more of Yardeni's warnings: - The U.S. manufacturing system can bog down if the M-bomb causes failures in Brazil, Korea or other sources of U.S. production components. - The M-bomb will extend the bear market (ie, falling stock prices) into the year 2000. - The Asian financial crisis and M-bomb combination may end up in a global depression. - Most CEOs don't understand technology. "They just don't get it." The Popular Science article failed to, but Yardeni in Fortune correctly made the connection between the M-bomb and the Asian financial crisis. (He is too Euro-centered though to call it a global crisis.) However, he missed a third factor: end-of-the-millennium mass psychology. The hysterical doomsday fears of millenarians can mutually reinforce valid public concerns about the financial crisis and the M-bomb, creating a truly explosive combination. I explained this explosive combination thoroughly in last week's four-part series. What do you do before a typhoon? The global crisis is like an approaching supertyphoon. Already, the strong winds and the rains are upon us. But the eye is not yet here and it is going to get worse. The eye of the typhoon will hit us in the year 2000, when the M-bomb triggers millions of machine failures that will widely disrupt the global financial and industrial system. It can suck the world into deep recession. Clearly, the coming years are going to be stormy for our economy and our nation. When a typhoon is coming, we don't bring out the picnic basket or throw a party for neighbors, as economists of the NEDA and the IMF would like us to do. We instead suspend regular work and other activities; we stock up on supplies; we look at the most vulnerable and help them prepare for the worst. Survival strategies As soon as possible, we need to switch from flamboyant expansive strategies to prudent survival strategies. We need to shift our priorities: - from maximizing gain to minimizing risk; - from efficiency to security and reliability; - from competition to cooperation; - from luxurious non-essentials to affordable basic needs; and - from profit-orientation to service-orientation Government policies today are the exact opposite, a legacy of the flamboyant and expansive policies of the Ramos and earlier administrations. Look at our rice and corn lands, the core of our food security. Businessmen continue to turn them into golf courses or to bury them in cement to build highways, subdivisions, commercial centers, and industrial parks. What is happening to our watersheds? Persistent logging and expanding mining operations are destroying them at an increasing pace. The government has just approved the Mining Act implementing rules and regulations, which are going to open the floodgates to more destructive mining operations in our watersheds, practically all of them covered by mining claims and foreign FTAA mining applications. A Journal item two days ago reports a school in Davao being razed to give way to a parking lot for a Gaisano shopping mall. Parking instead of elementary education? Our officials need a wakeup call very badly. Abnormal times: signal no. 5 Crisis can bring out the best--as well as the worst--in a person, a people, and a nation. It is in abnormal times like these when heroes--as well as villains--emerge, as the people's leaders respond differently to the challenges of the historical moment. It will be tragic if President Estrada fails to recognize this looming crisis and if he, instead, blindly heeds the advice of his incredibly over-optimistic advisers and prepares for a big party while a terrible supertyphoon approaches. Mr. President, we need those survival strategies to help our country confront a signal number five typhoon! From gattwd at corso.ch.planet.gen.nz Fri Nov 27 09:35:42 1998 From: gattwd at corso.ch.planet.gen.nz (Gatt Watchdog) Date: Fri, 27 Nov 1998 12:35:42 +1200 Subject: [asia-apec 922] More NZ Govt Hype on APEC Message-ID: <8TsLZe1w165w@corso.ch.planet.gen.nz> Speech: Smith On Trade Liberalisation   Thursday, 26 November 1998, 12:36 pm Press Release: New Zealand Government An Address By The Trade Minister Dr The Hon Lockwood Smith 1999: The Year for Trade Liberalisation Diplomatic Club Luncheon Ambassador Suite Plaza International Hotel Wellington 12.15 pm Thursday 26 November 1998 New Zealand sees 1999 as potentially a great year for trade liberalisation. As Trade Minister, I've spoken often about what I see as a unique convergence of events to achieve better market access for New Zealand exporters: * the possibility of a free trade agreement with the United States; * APEC's trade liberalisation agenda; * the World Trade Organisation's negotiations to liberalise agricultural trade, and the prospect of a full, comprehensive Round. Nineteen ninety nine is the year for each. We trust 1999 will be the year President Clinton is granted fast-track negotiating authority, allowing for progress towards an FTA. New Zealand is in the chair of APEC in 1999, and we'll be working to bind the EVSL package at the WTO. The WTO agriculture negotiations are mandated to start before the end of next year, and work is progressing well for them to be launched late in the year in the United States. From New Zealand's perspective, we don't see three such opportunities converging in quite the same way ever again. New Zealand chairing APEC is the biggest trade policy challenge we've ever faced - which is appropriate given that APEC has been described as the biggest trade policy initiative in history. The Leaders' Meeting will be the most important meeting ever held in this country. We relish the challenge. New Zealand is taking over the chair at a difficult time for the APEC region. The IMF has described the Asian Economic Crisis as "one of the worst financial crises in the post-war period". Latest Consensus Forecasts for 1998 suggest that South East Asia will contract by over 5% and for North Asia to experience no growth. Most APEC economies have been hard hit. The economic woes of one of APEC's newest members, Russia, have been severely exacerbated. Here in New Zealand, we have experienced a small recession. Globally, the IMF forecasts growth to be down to 2% in 1998. Some in the international media have criticised the extent of progress made at last week's APEC meetings in Kuala Lumpur. I can understand that criticism if one were to compare the outcome with the agenda set in Vancouver, and ignored the events in the region since. But were you to compare the KL outcome with how developments appeared to be heading only a few weeks before, I think you would reach a different conclusion. I believe it was a very credible outcome. I found it heartening. I believe economies with severe economic difficulties showed great vision and leadership in staying true to APEC's goals. I say that as Trade Minister from an economy which likes to see itself as being a major advocate for faster and more comprehensive liberalisation. The Bogor goals were reconfirmed: free and open trade and investment by developed APEC economies by 2010, and the same for developing APEC economies by 2020. In KL, a record six economies, including the economic powerhouses the United States and Japan, agreed to submit their Individual Action Plans, outlining how they intend to achieve those goals, to peer review in 1999. By the end of 1999, 12 of APEC's 21 economies will have been peer reviewed, including New Zealand which has, of course, already decided to abolish all our tariffs by 2006. It is a process that is working. Chile, for example, recorded in its IAP its intention to reduce its applied tariffs across the board from 11% to 6% by 2003. Indonesia has implemented its commitment to cut tariffs on all food items to a maximum of 5%. China has announced its commitment to cut tariffs on 5,700 industrial tariffs to an average of 10.8% by 2005. It will eliminate tariffs on 185 IT products by the same year. These are just three examples, but they show the APEC approach to trade liberalisation is working. Early Voluntary Sectoral Liberalisation is also firmly on track. Given the economic situation in the region, it would have been all too easy for some economies to start to unravel the package. They did not. They recognised that unravelling the package would have further undermined business confidence in the region. They recognised that by maintaining the commitment to the package, APEC could send a powerful signal which would help to restore business confidence. All sixteen participating economies, including the US and Japan, remain part of the package. All nine initial sectors, including the contentious forestry and fisheries sectors, remain part of the package. The Kuching end-rates and end-dates remain in place. And there is agreement that APEC economies may begin implementing the package immediately. Even more importantly, it goes to the WTO to become binding, and to achieve wider participation. There is commitment by all 16 participating APEC economies to endeavour to conclude agreement next year. In the context of the Asian Economic Crisis, that was a very credible agreement. All 16 participating economies have publicly committed themselves to the deal. We in New Zealand trust that they will live up to that commitment. At the same time, progress was made on the trade and investment facilitation front. APEC agreed to work towards aligning electrical and electronic equipment standards by 2004 for developed economies and 2008 for developing economies. A menu of options for investment liberalisation and facilitation was agreed to. We made progress on principles for government procurement, for conclusion in 1999. We agreed to expand the availability of multiple entry visas. The APEC Business Card offers accredited business travellers visa-free travel and speedy processing when visiting participating economies. New Zealand will join in March. In all these areas, the aim is to make doing business in the region cheaper and faster. APEC's business people have estimated that the average international transaction involves between 27 and 30 different parties, 40 documents, 200 data elements and the retyping of 60 to 70% of all data at least once. There is clearly a lot APEC can do to improve upon that throughout our region. In KL, APEC also endorsed an action programme on skills development. It's part of APEC's ecotech work, and is designed to contribute to a rapid improvements in four areas: upgrading the industrial skills base, spawning new entrepreneurs, improving technology skills, and strengthening institutional infrastructure to facilitate trade and investment liberalisation. The aim of all of APEC's ecotech work is to ensure that every APEC economy has the human, institutional and physical infrastructure to be able to implement and benefit from APEC's liberalisation agenda. The new action plan will certainly help. The economic crisis was also directly addressed by APEC leaders, with their Cooperative Growth Strategy. It included a renewed commitment to the 2010/2020 Bogor goals. It has a strong focus on encouraging growth-orientated macroeconomic policies. It will provide for additional financial assistance to soften the social impact of the crisis. It involves initiatives to encourage restructuring of the finance and corporate sectors and to restore trade finance and stable capital flows. And there are measures to strengthen domestic and international financial systems. The package will be supported by Japan's offer of a US$30 billion aid package as well as the joint Japan-US-ADB-World Bank initiative to revitalise private sector growth. APEC, the extended G-22, domestic economies, and multilateral and regional development banks will share responsibility for its implementation. It is in this context that New Zealand will take over the chair of APEC. We'll be developing initiatives around three key themes: 1. trade and investment liberalisation and facilitation 2. strengthening markets, and 3. broadening support for APEC One key priority for 1999 will be to develop the remaining six sectors for EVSL, among them food. We are also particularly interested in the APEC Business Advisory Council's proposal for an APEC Food System, which leaders have requested us to study. The goal of the proposed APEC Food System is to achieve a more open, more robust food system. It would be one which would better harness the resources of the region, efficiently linking producers, processors and consumers throughout the region. The idea is to maximise the contribution the food sector makes to the wealth of the region. ABAC's proposal calls for action in three areas: rural infrastructure, dissemination of technical advances and promotion of trade. Making progress on food will not be easy. But New Zealand sees progress on the issue as not just being about providing better access for our exporters. Ensuring the efficient production and distribution of food is critical to enhancing the long-term stability of a region with a growing population. It is a perfect APEC project involving all three of APEC's pillars: trade liberalisation, trade facilitation, and economic and technical cooperation. New Zealand also has work planned to strengthen markets and restore investment flows, as part of the ongoing response to the economic crisis. Closely related are ecotech measures to strengthen corporate and economic governance. In response to the KL meeting, there will be work on examining how competition and regulatory reforms can help facilitate trade and investment. We'll also be working on implementing APEC's Blueprint for Action on Electronic Commerce. Our APEC agenda is ambitious. But we're confident that each member economy is sufficiently committed to ensuring that the APEC process works. I don't deny that New Zealand sees the APEC process as leading to substantial gains for our exporters and economy. Seventy percent of our two way trade is with APEC economies. Eight of our top ten markets are APEC economies, and 12 of our top 20 tourist sources. Eighty percent of our investment comes from within APEC. But we also recognise the historic importance of APEC to the region. In the last 25 years, we've seen huge growth in regional consultation, cooperation and trade through the Asia Pacific region. It has meant that more people have risen out of poverty in a shorter period and on a greater scale than at any other place or time in human history. What's more, New Zealand holds the view that greater economic integration contributes to the maintenance of peace and greater stability. We believe that the success of APEC's trade and investment agenda will play a major part in ensuring continued improvements in standards of living and stability throughout the Pacific Rim. We see APEC as a development of world historical importance. We also see the World Trade Organisation as having the same role, but globally. We believe that all economies should, assuming obligations are met, be members of the WTO. We were the first country in the world to complete our bilateral negotiations with China on its accession to the WTO. We are supportive of Russia's joining, should it meet WTO obligations. Our ultimate goal - admittedly unrealistic in anything other than the long term - is free trade covering all economies and all goods and services. We believe that were that goal to be achieved, it would play a major role in promoting peace and enhancing living standards globally. To New Zealand, agriculture is of primary importance because it is our major export earner. But we also believe that free trade in agricultural products is the best way of ensuring food security in a peaceful world. We therefore look to the mandated WTO agriculture negotiations as not just being of benefit to the New Zealand economy. We see the negotiations as taking us towards the goal of efficient production and distribution of food globally, thereby contributing to international stability. At the negotiations next year, we will be seeking progress far in excess of that achieved from the Uruguay Round. With our friends in the Cairns Group, we will be seek trade in agricultural products to be put on the same basis as trade in other goods. Specifically, we will be seeking: * open market access and deep cuts in tariffs * the elimination and prohibition of export subsidies * the decoupling of domestic support from production Like New Zealand's APEC agenda, the Cairns Groups goals are ambitious but realistic. We recognise that to achieve them, a full, comprehensive Round may be required in order to allow for the necessary trade-offs. New Zealand is therefore a supporter of a Round, working with the Friends of the Round group to achieve one. The Friends of the Round is an open and informal collection of 13 WTO members. In Hong Kong, China, last week we said we believed that, with the financial crisis, economies needed further opportunities to trade their way back to improved prosperity and employment. We therefore concluded that a full and comprehensive Round is needed with the goal of securing a high quality outcome within a short duration. We will be working to achieve the launch of a Round following the Third WTO Ministerial in the United States next year. We urge all other WTO members to support those goals. I began by saying that New Zealand believes 1999 could potentially be a great year for trade liberalisation. We will be working hard for the liberalisation agenda to make progress as far and as fast as possible. We believe that is in the interests of the populations of all APEC economies and all WTO members. We know it will not be easy. We know there will have to be compromises along the way. But we urge all our partners to work constructively towards a regional and global trading environment which is as free and open as possible. Because we believe that would do more than almost anything else to help create more employment, prosperity and stability throughout the region and the world. Ends From panap at panap.po.my Thu Nov 26 14:42:49 1998 From: panap at panap.po.my (PAN Asia Pacific) Date: Thu, 26 Nov 1998 14:42:49 Subject: [asia-apec 923] SUARAM UPDATE ON MALAYSIA (fwd) Message-ID: <3238@panap.po.my> FORWARDED MAIL ------- From: suaram@geocities.com Date: 25 Nov 98 Originally To: fidh@csi.com SUARAM UPDATE: 26 November 1998 1. ISA Arrest - Mr. Zulkefli Othman has been confirmed to be detained under the Internal Security Act. 2. Remand of Tian Chua and two others. Tian Chua's lawyer, M. Puravalen, has put in an application for a revision of the magistrates decision, citing illegal detention (re: 24 hours dateline) among reasons, to High Court judge Patail. It was rejected (surprise!) and the lawyers vow to continue their appeal. Tian Chua was also taken to INSAN office and a search of his room was conducted and some documents were confiscated. One of SUARAM's staff was able to meet and converse with him. He was told by Tian Chua that the police have transferred him to another lock-up cell, away from others detained for alleged illegal gathering. He was also hit by a police officer on one side of his face this morning. The SUARAM staff was able to examine the insides of his mouth and found some cuts. Tian Chua's shirt collar was also spotted with dried blood. There was no evidence of bruising or swelling 3. SUARAM's concerns We are concerned that Tian Chua, aside from selectively persecuted, may face more bodily harm. This stems from one earlier police report which he made and described in detail how he was beaten up when he was first arrested on 24th September, 1998. (please check our website) We are also concerned that as soon as his remand is finished, he may be detained under the Internal Security Act. This has happened to at least 2 other men in the last few weeks. We urge you to take immediate action, so as to ensure the safety, well-being and the immediate release of Tian Chua, and the other detainees. We wish to thank all the numerous actions, letters, emails and faxes that we had received on behalf of Tian Chua. Especially those who had taken time to picket. Please keep the pressure up! We are touched by your solidarity and support, and together with all of you, we will see a better tomorrow in Malaysia. Thank you. In solidarity, Elizabeth Wong Coordinator SUARAM -------------------------------------------------------- ABOLISH I.S.A.! MANSUHKAN I.S.A! SIGN JUST WORLD'S WHITE RIBBON/SIGNATURE CAMPAIGN FOR JUSTICE! http://www.jaring.my/just 0000,8080,8080On the occasion of the 50th Anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, please urge our Malaysian government to ratify the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. --------------------------------------------------------- SUARA RAKYAT MALAYSIA (SUARAM) outstruggling 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 Fri Nov 27 11:24:41 1998 From: gattwd at corso.ch.planet.gen.nz (Gatt Watchdog) Date: Fri, 27 Nov 1998 14:24:41 +1200 Subject: [asia-apec 924] NZ: Exporter questions Apec's value Message-ID: >From "The Dominion", Wellington 25/11/98 Exporter questions Apec's value By Marta Steeman FOR industrialist Gilbert Ullrich, advocate of more Government incentives for exporters, Apec is an "extraordinary business" and he questions if there is much for New Zealand exporters to gain by belonging to it. Mr Ullrich led a campaign last year opposing big business rejection of a $100 million business assistance plan. Opening Ullrich Aluminium's new fabrication and service centre in Petone, he said that according to the Foreign Affairs and Trade Ministry, by opting for Apec policies, New Zealand would be further ahead in 20 years time by only 0.4 per cent more than gross national product gains it would have made by sticking with the Uruguay Round of trade liberalisation. But the Uruguay Round gains were bigger for New Zealand, according to the Australian Bureau of Agricultural Resource Economics. It had suggested that over 20 years New Zealand would benefit with gnp increases of between 1.6 per cent and 3.5 per cent, Mr Ullrich said. He was intending to be a delegate at the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation conference in April for small to medium-size businesses and "we are seriously supposed to regard this conference as the engine room of growth for the region." But New Zealand sent nobody to the Apec small business meeting in 1996, 1997 and this year. So clearly it was not a high priority. Unilaterally reducing our tariffs and destroying many small industries was not very smart, Mr Ullrich said. "If Apec turns out to have been an exercise in self-delusion, it won't bring back the industries or jobs we consigned to oblivion in our desire to lead the world." There was a New Zealand minister at the Apec conference in Malaysia crowing that Japan had allowed a contentious issue - tariff cuts on fish and forestry - to be referred to the World Trade Organisation for resolution. "I can't help feeling that this was the Japanese equivalent of our parliamentary practice of sending things to the graveyard of a select committee. "I don't know the answer to the question as to why our Government will go to such lengths to be involved in this whole extraordinary business." From cynth at pd.jaring.my Fri Nov 27 12:41:47 1998 From: cynth at pd.jaring.my (Cynthia Gabriel) Date: Fri, 27 Nov 1998 11:41:47 +0800 Subject: [asia-apec 925] [Fwd: letter from Tian Chua 25/11] Message-ID: <365E1F7A.67A7F837@pd.jaring.my> LETTER FROM TIAN CHUA 25th NOVEMBER 1998 (received 26/11/98 by SUARAM) Campbell Police Station Jalan Dang Wangi Kuala Lumpur Dear friends, Now is 24/11, midnite. I am spending my fourth night in the lock-up. There are about 14 others so-called $A(Breformasi$B(B inmates kept in here. Some of them were arrested during the KLCC demo; and various other occasions. The first night I was kept with the big cell with mostly drug-related OKT (Orang Kena Tahan/inmates) as the police called them. The next cell, cell No 4. is the $A(Breformasi$B(B cell where most suspected supporters of reformasi were kept. Life in here, needless to say, is extremely boring. We try to keep ourselves in high spirits. I moved over to Cell 4 when the police on duty did not notice. From time to time, police would try to separate me from the group. I repeatedly went back when they changed shift. However whenever I got moved, I would use the opportunity to chat with other OKTs, do some ED. Tonight I am shifted to Cell 6 because this afternoon, when a few of the $A(Breformasi$B(B detainees were taken for 113, they all answered, "I will tell in court". The Investigating Officer, Selva, got very pissed off and asked the police to separate me. The police officers also from time to time use racial sentiments to frighten people. They told the $A(Breformasi$B(B detainees not to listen to NGOs and also specifically said that they were Malay thus should not expect assistance from non-Malay NGOs. The I.O. Selva also told the magistrate during my remand hearing that one of the reason for my detention was I, being a Chinese, was present in a Malay area. Can U believe that? We are not only living in a fascist state, the government is also establishing an apartheid! Racialism seems to the last trump card Mahathir can use to break the people$B(Bs movement. The police (CID & SB included) all repeat the same line about racial riots - Bosnia, Indonesia etc. Most of the time, when we are being interrogated, the officers would be endlessly lecturing us about the country will be broken up like Bosnia or Indonesia. What do they know about what really happened in these places? It is clear that the regime is using the old trick in its last desperate attempt to cling to power. But I am sure that the active participation of all races in the people$B(Bs struggle will smash the lies into pieces. Besides racism, violence is even more prominent among the police. Violence is the way they express their power. Within the walls of the lock-up, almost every individual was beaten in the process of arrest or interrogation. Forced confession is probably the only means of investigation for the police. With me, they were a bit more careful. Only on the first nite (i.e. Sunday about 1:00 am), a uniformed police officer, Syed Fadil, at Balai Stadium waved his (end-part) semiautomatic rifle over my head when I was being escorted to the vehicle. Later the lock-up officers (Shamba, Latif, Mustafa and Zulkifli (?)) again tried to remind me of the violent culture with a rough introduction. To show his authority, Shamba forcibly stripped off my shirt and pants when he was imposing the so-called lock-up rule. The zip of my pant was torn in the process. To be fair, a number of officers were relatively calm and peaceful, at least to me. Except one $A(BHashim$B(B who has a bad temper. He was very abusive towards new entries to the lock-up. A few immigrant detainees were very badly abused when they checked in. Last nite (23/11 Monday) (Day of Remand), I told hjm that one friend (from reformasi group) who has leg injury due to police punishment needed to be hospitalised. (as the magistrate agreed). He got angry, since I have challenged his authority. He ordered me to go back to my cell. He began to be abusive in his language and manner. So I too rebuke him in loud voice. As I walked back to my cell, I warned him that he was wrong in being very violent towards OKT. When I was in my cell, he rushed in and threatened to assault me. Fortunately his colleague calmed him down. He also sounded apologetic later. Actually I have no intention to challenge him. I just want to make a point that OKT/inmates have to be treated with some dignity. Many OKT complained to me that they were really treated like animals. The attitude of the police is breeding more violence. The detention of many reformasi fighters is providing them a good education. Now people are aware that reformasi is not restricted to political change nor it is an abstract idea. Reformasi must include 3 crucial aspects: the institution of police, prisons and judiciary. Our cases clearly shows that legal procedures and the rule of law were completely ignored. Until now, I am still unaware of which laws I have violated. This morning I asked the 4 SB officers who interviewed me (Subra, James, Zol and one I forgot). "What have I done which is considered a threat to peace and order of this society?" They were not able to answer directly. Actually Subra said what I did as NGO was not really a problem. They are only concerned with people who might cause riots. (Not too sure he referred to the police or so called $A(Breformasi$B(B). When I confronted them on whether they feel the country is on the brink of disorder, they said, "No, it is far from it!" Apparently these SB, differ from the view of Dr. M.! I suppose this is also an admission that police were over-reacting towards those peaceful weekend public gatherings. Thus evidently there must be a reformasi of the police force. This is part of our program of $A(Breformasi total$B(B. No doubt, negative aspects of the police such as violence, unprofessionalism, corruption (e.g. RM 50 for a packet of cigarettes, a few roti canai; RM 100 per phone call; drug pushing) have to be eliminated. We also need positive measures such as improving the police salary, facilities, efficiency etc. (I hope police could support our $A(Breformasi$B(B based on these!) The lock-up conditions also need major overhaul. Although this is not my first time here and I am trying to adapt myself, the conditions are still atrocious. With the Ventalin, I survived the dust of the mouldy blanket at nite. But bugs and mosquitoes constantly keep me awake at nite. I am trying to get used to the food but clean water is a big problem. Our only access to drinking water is from the tap in the wash room. However what really disturbs me is still the culture of violence surrounding me in this lockup. The remand is like a mini ISA where detainees are constantly being threatened and treated with violence - from the 1st moment when they enter. I just can$B(Bt imagine how I can endure this $(H(B I am also constantly told of stories of beatings, torture....I feel like shouting loudly and endlessly "Stop! Stop! Stop! " (Actually I have just shouted to stop a Singh policeman who was beating up a new entry a moment ago - 4:30 a.m., 23/11) As my blank space is coming to an end, I shall stop here. I will write more if I can smuggle new pieces of paper in the next days. Lastly please send my regards to my family and comrades who are concerned about me. I am fine and in good spirits. Long live the people$B(Bs struggle Tian 5 a.m. morning, 25/11 -------------- next part -------------- An embedded message was scrubbed... From: suaram@geocities.com Subject: letter from Tian Chua 25/11 Date: Thu, 26 Nov 1998 20:34:55 +0800 Size: 9422 Url: http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/private/asia-apec/attachments/19981127/68951738/attachment.mht From oppenh at theory.physics.ubc.ca Fri Nov 27 15:14:01 1998 From: oppenh at theory.physics.ubc.ca (Jonathan Oppenheim) Date: Thu, 26 Nov 1998 22:14:01 -0800 (PST) Subject: [asia-apec 926] Suggested Questions for Media during APEC Message-ID: <199811270614.WAA22473@theory.physics.ubc.ca> The following is from our press pack (paparazzi pack) that we gave out to media during our Mock APEC on Nov. 18th. The media were given fake press passes which had the words "I killed Lady Di" on them. Although we tried to satirize the media as well as the 21 world leaders, the media ended up satirizing themselves. Instead of asking any questions, they just wanted photos of our mock riot police pepper spraying students. During APEC in Vancouver, we saw stories with such themes as: "What does Bill Clinton eat in his motorcade?" The RCMP Musical Ride! Traffic problems caused by APEC, A profile of the horse that pulled the cart for the 18 spouses of the world leaders, and a wonderful feature on the 18 spouses visiting the Capilano suspension bridge, and standing in the middle of it (how's that for a security threat) There was of course, almost no mainstream media attention given to the effects of APEC itself, and documents tabled before the RCMP Public Complaints Commission showed that the Prime Minister's Office deliberately released "Human interest stories" to distract the public from issues around the environment, human rights, working conditions, consumerism, corporatism etc. j ----- Begin Included Message ----- Paparazzi Pack Welcome to APEC 98. Due to budget cuts, APEC is being held at UBC again!!! We kindly thank Coca-Cola Bottling Corp. for their generous contribution to this year's Summit. For your shopping convenience, we have located the Leaders' Retreat in the mall. Please stay clear of the security zone and the police. If you wish to film demonstrators, they are located downtown somewhere. Thank you for your cooperation, and enjoy your visit to this beautiful campus! Suggested Question for the Paparazzi In order to aid your reporting we have taken the liberty of providing you with the following suggested questions. Although you are free to make up your own questions, we recommend that you not ask anything that may be construed as critical or probing. Remember what happened to Terry. Also, please only take photographs when the leaders are smiling. 1. Roots Canada designed the jackets you wore last year. Who designed the line of batik underwear that you are all wearing this year? 2. Boxers or briefs? 3. Monica, does the President smoke Cubans? 4. If you could be any kind of leafy vegetable, what kind would you be? 5. How has trade-liberalization benefited your economy? 6. What color is the sky in your world? 7. Are you striving for excellence as your economy heads into the 21st century? 8. What are some of the great accomplishments of APEC 98? 9. Monica, why hasn't the U.S. bombed Iraq yet? 10. Where do you prefer to dine when travelling abroad? 11. How do you deal with the constant stress that a great leader such as yourself must endure? 12. Are you suffering from jet lag? 13. What brand of bottled water do you drink? 14. Which tourist attractions have you visited during your stay in Malaysia? 15. How have Malaysians dealt with the severe traffic problems that accompany APEC? 16. Do you find me attractive? 17. Can I help you with your fly? ----- End Included Message ----- From rverzola at phil.gn.apc.org Fri Nov 27 21:02:30 1998 From: rverzola at phil.gn.apc.org (Roberto Verzola) Date: Fri, 27 Nov 1998 21:02:30 Subject: [asia-apec 927] Y2K discussion on the Global Knowledge for Devt list Message-ID: <199811281322.VAA09124@phil.gn.apc.org> Y2K PANEL DISCUSSION (Nov. 1-8, 1998) This week the discussion on the impact of the Y2K problem or Millennium Bug on developing countries was launched. The discussion will last at least until November 20. Panellists Douglass Carmichael (USA), Roberto Verzola (the Philippines) and Henry Watermeyer (South Africa) each posted an opening message to the list. Roberto Verzola's argued in his contribution "The Millennium Bomb: A Time Bomb in the Heart of the Industrial Economies (Should we prepare for the blast or the fallout?)" that developing countries have less to fear from the Year 2000 problem, or Millennium Bomb as he calls it, than highly industrialized societies. "The less highly-automated - and therefore electronically-dependent - a society is, the less vulnerable it will be to the M-bomb." He suggests that developing countries should be more concerned about the economic and financial ramifications of the impact of Y2K on the North. He proposes to build 'firewalls', that is isolate banking institutions and local markets from the global market and unlink local currencies from the US dollar. "Forget about open economies and globalization. The more open our economy is, the more susceptible we are going to be to millennium fallout." According to Douglass Carmichael "the real problem is that the overall effect of [Y2K] is fairly unknown". He sees in the Y2K problem an opportunity to change the organization of the global economy. Thus, efforts to exterminate the millennium bug "should not be to act fast to make Y2K merely go away. We should look at all attempts at fixing to be also thoughtful investments in a future we want. Doing all the work, at the very high cost, should result in businesses and organizations that are more effective, safer, better documented, and aligned with the organizations' hopes for the post Y2K environment." Carmichael also points out that there are big problems with method: "Reporting the percentage of systems fixed (or in the various subphases of the process; assessment, remediation, testing, return) do not tell us much. Reporting must include stories about what is being found along the way, and must include stories about the implications if what is not yet fixed does not get fixed". He mentions Mexico as a developing country that seems to have implemented policies that will make it ready for the new millennium. Henry Watermeyer notes that the nature of the Y2K problem is "fairly well understood", especially by the private sector. He is afraid, however, that in particular, governments and the small and medium-sized enterprise sector will be affected on a large scale. Both developing countries and highly industrialized societies will be effected by the millennium bomb. Watermeyer said "There is a view that suggests that the problem in the lesser developed countries may be smaller. I suggest that while that may well be true, there are in almost all these countries some systems, like air traffic control, banking and the like that will effect not only the citizens of those countries but also those who pass through. Physically or virtually!" He sees two major sectors at risk: those who have large and key facilities under their control, like power generation, telecommunications and air traffic control; and those people who don't know that they are at risk, for example hospital administrators, who don't know that the equipment they use contains embedded computers. He sees an important role for public awareness campaigns. "The domino effect of business and service failure is going to put the fragile world economy into a spin", he concludes. Y2K PANEL DISCUSSION (Nov. 8-14, 1998) After their first contributions the panelists Douglass Carmichael, Roberto Verzola and Henry Watermeyer responded to each other and subsequently the discussion was opened up to other GKD members. Henry Watermeyer pointed out that although we do not know the exact impact of Y2K, developing countries can protect themselves from the bug. Yet he warned that "the year 2000 and its impact is a bit like falling pregnant; 'you will either be affected or you will not'. You cannot be a little pregnant!!". He claimed that governments will not be able to protect us all from the Millennium bug. Legislation will not help either. He recommended a 9-step plan to be taken by every computer systems manager. He also described how his university (Witwatersrand, South Africa) was making its own systems Y2K compliant. According to panelist Roberto Verzola globalization has made the problem worse: "The problem should be obvious to any system designer: the presence of too many global variables, the geometric rise in potential interactions among widely distributed components, too much coupling among subsystems -- hallmarks of a poorly-designed, buggy, failure-prone system." He suggested a 'modularization' instead of 'globalization' type of design: break up complex systems into smaller subsystems, which all have as little interaction with each other as possible except through very well-defined interfaces. Mutatis mutandis this 'modularization' analogy can be applied to economies of developing countries: they should become more self-reliant than they currently are. All panelists seemed to agree that as much as Y2K forms a thread for the global economy it also offers opportunities for change and innovation. Panelist Douglass Carmichael agreed with Roberto Verzola. He introduced the concept of 'neo-feudalism': "Y2K nudges towards decentralized technologies. We might see the time coming when production at a distance loses its advantage and local production gains." In his opinion it is important to link strategies across countries and realize that in being more self-reliant developing countries are ultimately better off. He also pointed out that the government of Honduras has decided that its Y2K policy is to go beyond recovery and to redesign systems. A GKD member posted an article from the Financial Times on Y2K readiness in Europe. Cap Gemini, Europe's biggest software and services company, urges governments to give up a broad-based approach to the problem and focus their efforts on fixing computer systems that operate essential services. Another member wondered what plans exist in the USA and United Nations to accomodate the substantial impact of Y2K on the world economy. Many discussants raised the importance of considering Y2K not mainly as a technical problem but also as a 'psychological' one. Alarmist language such as 'bomb' or 'war' might contribute to anxieties among (rather uninformed) citizens. The tension will very likely rise as the millennium approaches. Another member raised the question that if it is too late to achieve a broad "cleaning-up" then which are the areas on which to concentrate? Should a disaster management approach be taken? In response a member warned that if governments "treat the M-bomb as the worldwide disaster it really threatens to become, all confidence is off and the whole financial bubble can burst. We are all treading today on ice that is getting thinner as the global financial crisis deepens and the millennium approaches, and last thing governments want to do is start a stampede." Henry Watermeyer repeated that "in essence the problem is a technical one ... but the implications, as with so many IT projects, are not technical at all. They are economic and social." He sees opportunities for developing countries' economies after the new millennium. Finally, GKD members suggested a number of useful resources and practical steps to make systems Y2K compliant. Y2K RESOURCES **On embedded systems** 'National and Global Implications of the Year 2000 Embedded Systems Crisis' by Paula D. Gordon, PhD. The Institute of Electrical Engineering: http://www.iee.org/2000risk/> Plant Y2K: A white Paper that Discusses the Significance of the Effect of the Millenium Bug (Y2K) on Process Control, Factory Automation and Embedded Systems in Manufacturing Companies: Roleigh Martins' 'Phenomenal Year 2000 Links': ** On health systems ** US Food and Drug Administration: Year 2000 Biomedical Engineering Database (New South Wales Department of Health, Australia): Healthcare's Year 2000 Information Clearinghouse: http://www.rx2000.org> ** On risk assessment** 'Probabilities of Year 2000 Damages' by Capers Jones 'Year 2000 Contingency Planning for Municipal Governments' By Capers Jones 'Year 2000 Risk Assessment and Planning for Individuals': 'Testimony before the U.S. House of Representative, Committee on Science', James L. Cassell, Group Vice President, Director of Research, GartnerGroup, November 4, 1998. [This paper discusses the readiness of countries across Asia and Africa] **Tool kits** Y2K Starter Kit: Y2K PANEL DISCUSSION (Nov. 15-21, 1998) The discussion on the impact of the Y2K problem or Millennium Bug on developing countries was continued. A more detailed summary of the Y2K discussion and the main findings and conclusion will be posted on GKD in the week around November 30. The World Bank posted a message on its efforts to support developing countries to address the Y2K problem. Through its Information for Development Program (infoDev) Initiative about 20 international awareness-raising seminars have been organized since June 1998. There is also a grant program, to which about 50 countries have applied. In addition, infoDev has developed a Y2K toolkit. A member submitted a recent trend monitor bulletin, based on content analysis of major newspapers and reports. Recently, reports are starting to appear saying that already hard-pressed Y2K remediation budgets are being cut back because of falling revenues resulting from the global economic crisis. Meanwhile, many companies in the United States are characterized as hiding problems in their Y2K programs because of fears of how such knowledge would affect their stock prices, not to mention the confidence of their customers and their suppliers. Another impediment to sharing knowledge about Y2K is that companies are being strongly advised by their lawyers to keep their experience of Y2K remediation projects confidential so as not to expose themselves to lawsuits. In the USA and the United Kingdom, where preparations are among the furthest advanced, even in the areas of basic infrastructural services -- such as water and electricity -- there is no certainty that continuity of service will be possible, especially considering the incidence of software project delays and the ubiquity of embedded processors which regulate time dependent functions. Reports from within the oil industry emphasize the enormity and complexity of the problems faced, especially in terms of finding, replacing and testing of an almost uncountable number of embedded processors. Financial institutions are among the furthest advanced in Y2K remediation and contingency planning in the USA and the UK. In Europe because of the emphasis on the Euro conversion, financial institutions are lagging far behind their USA and UK competitors. Indeed in some circles, Y2K compliance is beginning to be seen as a major strategic advantage in an industry in which rapid consolidation has become a grim necessity. Content analysis suggests that Continental Europe is between a year and 18 months behind the USA and six months to a year behind the UK, both in terms of Y2K public awareness and remedial action. Japan, China and East Asia are seen as being more than two years behind. In these countries, the importance of contingency planning will soon be greater than trying to fix the computer trouble. The upside, though, is that they will be able to save on the astronomical costs reprogramming computers and replacing chips. The Internet Society's (ISOC) "Internet and the Millennium Problem (2000)" Working Group has made an inventory of the important Internet protocols directly related to the Internet, and their most popular implementations with respect to the millennium problem. Conclusion is that by and large the Internet will not be affected by the bug. The Working Group's web pages can be found at . GKD members agreed that the main impact of the Millennium bug will be through so-called embedded systems. Embedded systems are microprocessor-based systems whose software are written in assembly language and are burned in ROM soldered in circuit boards (and thus are extremely difficult to modify). One can find embedded systems in electronic products ranging from mainframes to microwaves. GKD members mentioned different estimates of affected systems. A member posted a revealing Y2K compliance assessment of major companies in different sectors. Of the manufacturing, laboratory and facility systems of a pharmaceutical company with global operations in 39 countries, 18% of the more than 4000 items that were analyzed were found to be non-compliant and 17% would cause a plant shutdown or would affect production. Without any remediation at all, total plant failure is a very good bet. It was estimated that seven out of nine manufacturing lines would stop running within the first 3-4 days, and the network and telecommunications equipment wouldn't work. Security systems would admit anyone with any credit card and the in-plant power substation would fail along with municipal water. For a major beverage company, with global operations that include 47 plants in 21 countries, it was found that 24% were non-compliant systems and 28% of them would affect production. The inventory and assessment took 20 weeks and cost $893,000. Time to fix was estimated at 35 weeks and the cost at $2.9 million. The evaluation also showed that the single most important thing that can make a year 2000 project successful is the degree to which executive management is involved. The projected risk levels for failure of all the units of these companies was between 60% and 90% if the non-IT parts of the business were not found and fixed. Many GKD members expressed concerns that the discussion should focus less on the millennium bomb problem itself and more on the fallout: the financial and economic consequences. In the Philippines, government efforts are confined solely to the technical issues, with hardly any discussion (or perhaps they are confidential) of the need to protect us from the financial fallout. A national Y2K Commission estimates the total conversion costs at P270 billion (more than $6 billion), which is roughly half of the national budget or 8% of the GNP. A member from Papua New Guinea said that its Treasury and Planning Department had been working hard over the last 3 or 4 years to get the government's finance systems Y2K compliant. In other sectors there are still many problems. Like many developing countries Papua New Guinea dependents on outside financial assistance through loans and aid and is also part of the world trading community (as a primary, mineral and other resource producer). This means that problems in other countries are going to affect the country. The GKD member suggested that developing countries should be given a three-year (1999-2001) interest free period on loans to tide them over the inevitable Y2K fallout. Many GKD subscribers agreed with panelist Roberto Verzola who emphasized that the millennium bomb is the latest symptom of a deeply-flawed paradigm that is based on globalization and gain maximization. 'Humanity needs a wake-up call badly. Because it will occur more or less simultaneously throughout the world and will lead to major social disruptions, the millennium bomb provides this wake-up call. Already, one of its positive impacts is that it is leading some communities to change their paradigm radically--towards survival, sufficiency and sustainability.' The Moderators posted two articles on Y2K compliance in India. India, with its enormous information technology (IT) resources, can be a catalyst in helping the world mitigate the impact of the Y2K crisis, says G.K. Jayaram, chairman of Transformation Systems, an international information technology consulting firm with centers in Chennai and Dubai. 'The United States and Europe do not have adequate engineering resources to solve the Y2K crisis. For that reason, India becomes a crucially important country to satisfy the world's Y2K human resource needs.' India produces about 50,000 computer science engineers each year, nearly twice the number that the USA produces and has played a key role in addressing the worldwide resource crunch. Jayaram said it was imperative that nations that are best prepared and have the most resources, assist those that face the most acute problems in terms of Y2K readiness. 'What we need, is the equivalent of a Y2K Technology Marshall Plan', he concluded. A second article from the Indian Economist indicated that almost half of the commercial banks in India had reached Y2K compliance by the end of September 1998. The Indian central bank offers Y2K certificates. The next Y2K Action Day is on November 27, 1998. InfoTech 2000 of infoTech Systems Ltd. in Uganda has set up a pro-active non-profit making initiative to turn information into a knowledge base for Y2K management in Uganda. They are publishing CountDown 2000 as a quarterly publication about the millennium problem in Uganda CountDown 2000 will circulate to all IT managers and senior management of the private and public sector in Uganda and in the East African and Great lakes region. Y2K RESOURCES ** Articles and Books ** On embedded systems "Millennium Bug Devises New Pests for Africa's Optimists" [an AP report dated November 17, posted at San Diego Source on Y2K and fears regarding the South African health care system] "South Africa Retailers Fear Consumer Chaos at Millenium" [a Reuters reported posted at CNN Interactive - discusses the potential for panic caused by Y2K speculation and fears.] "Time Bomb 2000!" by Ed & Jennifer Yourdon ** Listservs ** The World Bank is hosting three Y2K discussion lists (one in English, one in French and one in Spanish); you can subscribe at the following URLs: [English] [francais] [espanol] ** Tool Kit ** The World Bank infoDev Tool Kit provides a resource to governments for understanding the implications of the Year 2000 problem, for assessing the risks and possible strategies for managing the risk, and for supporting potential government action, including development of a national plan, and establishing a Year 2000 organization. The Tool Kit also provides resources for conducting inventories, risk assessments, contingency planning, vendor management, check lists and references to other relevant sources of information. The Tool Kit is available on the World Bank's website: . ** Web Sites ** Countdown 2000 Uganda: Sangers Review of Y2K News Reports: Y2K Trend Monitor: Year 2000 Information Center: World Bank Y2K infoDev: From gattwd at corso.ch.planet.gen.nz Sat Nov 28 13:09:23 1998 From: gattwd at corso.ch.planet.gen.nz (Gatt Watchdog) Date: Sat, 28 Nov 1998 16:09:23 +1200 Subject: [asia-apec 928] The $45 million millstone Message-ID: >From Weekend Herald, Auckland, 28-29 November 1998 The $45 million millstone Negative headlines erupting out of last week's dismal Apec summit in Kuala Lumpur have got Wellington worried. With next year's summit in Auckland just 10 months away, Foreign Minister Don McKinnon is trying hard to convince that some good came from this year's fiasco. The Government long ago hired some public relations consultants to "sell" Apec and massage sceptical Aucklanders into accepting the disruption that will occur. But the "Apec is good for you" startegy has been derailed by squabbling and paroxysms in Kuala Lumpur, making the economic grouping look about as dynamic as a two-toed sloth. If next year's talkfest is as ineffectual taxpayers will be pondering just a month or two out from the election why they forked out $45 million for the pleasure of hosting the whole shebang. From perpinan at csi.com.ph Sun Nov 29 15:30:50 1998 From: perpinan at csi.com.ph (Mary Soledad =?iso-8859-1?Q?Perpi=F1an?=) Date: Sun, 29 Nov 1998 14:30:50 +0800 Subject: [asia-apec 929] Fwd: Indigenous Rights Draft Declaration in Peril Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19981129143050.006eb9e0@csi.com.ph> > > Kindly send this to those involved with indigenous rights and human rights in general. Thanks. >IF YOU ALREADY KNOW ABOUT THIS, PLEASE FORWARD THIS LETTER TO >CONCERNED > >>FRIENDS AND ALLIES. >>As some of you already know, I will be one member of an American >Friends > >>Service Committee delegation at the upcoming UN Intersessional Working > >>Group on the Draft Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples in > >>Geneva, Switzerland, from November 30-December 11. >My Native allies have > >>said that they believe that at this meeting, the US Government will > >>attempt to gut the Draft Declaration of all meaningful protections of > >>Indigenous Peoples' fundamental rights and destroy its >future as a strong > >>human rights document once and for all. > >>Native Peoples from throughout the world labored for ten years, at >great > >>personal hardship and sacrifice, to produce a declaration which they >agreed > >>is a MINIMUM standard for the protection of their rights. Central to >the > >>Draft are provisions protecting collective rights, and recognizing > >>Indigenous nations right to self-determination, equal with all other > >>nations. Article 3 on self-determination is seen by many as the most > >>important article of the Draft, because it protects Indigenous >Peoples' > >>right to self-determination, using language taken directly from the UN > >>Charter. Native Peoples who have participated in this process for years > >>are in unity that this article must not be changed in any way, nor the > >>State governments be allowed to weaken the protections of collective > >>rights. > >>For our part, we here have put together an urgent action network of >people > >>who COMMIT to responding to 3 urgent action alerts between November 30 >and > >>December 11. I am asking you, please, to be part of this network. > >>When I say COMMIT, let me explain what I mean. In this electronic age, >we > >>all can and do receive LOTS of urgent actions. I get several daily. >I > >>respond to very few. I don't think I'm unusual in this regard, so for >this > >>reason, we need to secure commitments in advance. I have nothing >against > >>people agreeing to post this to various lists, AS WELL, but in order >for > >>this action to be effective, those of us here (at KAOS Central) and in > >>Geneva, need to KNOW-beyond a shadow of a doubt-just how many > >>calls/faxes/emails our elected leaders have gotten, and from where, so >that > >>we can confront them with specifics on their policies and demand that >they > >>respond to the American public. > >>What I'm asking of you is this: that you commit, for those two weeks, >to > >>being either a "branch" or a "leaf". If you're a leaf, your job is >simply > >>to respond to the urgent action alerts by immediately contacting a list >of > >>Washington types which we will provide you with. It shouldn't take >long. > >>You could do it over a lunch half hour. > >> > >>If you're a branch, you have the same responsibilities as a leaf, but >you > >>also have the added responsibility of following up with at least five >(5) > >>leaves to make sure they did their job, and then passing that >information > >>back up the tree (KAOS Central is also known as the trunk). You could >do > >>this on a coffee break. You will be given all the necessary contact info > >>for doing this. We have a confirmation letter we will email you as >soon > >>as you commit with the necessary information. > >> > >>PLEASE CONSIDER BEING A BRANCH and recruiting at least 5 leaves from >among > >>your friends and associates (in other words, people I don't know, >can't > >>reach, and can't organize). I know you all are really busy, but I >REALLY > >>need your help and support on this. I really do believe that, working > >>together, we CAN make a difference on this one. > >> > >>PLEASE RESPOND ASAP - Thanks so much. > >> > >>YOU ARE ENCOURAGED TO FORWARD THIS LETTER TO YOUR LISTS, BUT PLEASE DO >NOT > >>ADD OR DELETE FROM IT. THANK YOU!! > >> > >>Love, Val Phillips > >>AFSC-Colorado > >>Indigenous Peoples' Rights Project > > From arnel at freemail.webquest.com Thu Nov 26 16:19:02 1998 From: arnel at freemail.webquest.com (arnel f. de guzman) Date: Thu, 26 Nov 1998 07:19:02 +0000 Subject: [asia-apec 932] Joint Statement on Mrs. Miranda and other Detained OFWs Message-ID: <199812010750.PAA27542@mailhost.webquest.com> JOINT STATEMENT November 25, 1998 IMMEDIATE FREEDOM FOR VIOLETA FAIR TRIAL FOR DETAINED OFWs We, concerned individuals and representatives of non-governmental organizations (NGOs), gathered today to raise our collective voices to seek the freedom of our compatriot, Mrs. Violeta Miranda, a Filipina nurse currently detained at the Al Nisa Jail in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Recent reports stated that the Riyadh Investigation Commission has already recommended to the Riyadh Governor the release of Mrs. Miranda as it believes that the charges against her are unfounded. We earnestly ask the concerned Saudi authorities through the Saudi Ambassador to the Philippines, His Excellency Saleh Al Ghamdi, to expedite the release of Mrs. Miranda. If it is Mrs. Miranda's wish to stay in the country for good, we also ask the Overseas Workers Welfare Administration (OWWA) to render all necessary assistance in order for Mrs. Miranda and her family to live decently in the Philippines. We are equally concerned with the safety of two other Filipinos detained in connection with the case of Mrs. Miranda. Mr. Jerry Roxas and Ms. Leonora Jimeno are facing charges that carry the death penalty in Saudi Arabia. We ask that a speedy and fair trial be given them, with full assistance from the Philippine Embassy in Riyadh. Knowing fully that the cases of Mrs. Miranda and Ms. Jimeno are just but two of thousands of cases involving Filipino women migrant workers, we pledge to continue working systematically for other disadvantaged women migrant workers. As of June 1998, the Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) has reported that a total of 936 overseas Filipino workers (OFWs) are under detention in various jails worldwide. We think this figure is grossly underestimated. We are combining our meager resources to monitor, research, lobby, and campaign for abused, detained, maltreated fellow Filipinos working abroad. This will be a pro-active and long-term campaign to ensure that Filipino workers work with dignity and human rights in foreign lands. Original signed: AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL- PHILIPPINES ATENEO HUMAN RIGHTS CENTER SOCORRO BALLESTEROS GRAZIANO BATTISTELLA (SCALABRINI MIGRATION CENTER) COALITION AGAINST TRAFFICKING OF WOMEN (CATW) ALMA CONCEPCION (Movie Actress) CONCERNED FILIPINOS OF AUCKLAND, NEW ZEALAND CONCERNED WOMEN OF AUCKLAND, NEW ZEALAND ATTY. MILABEL CRISTOBAL DELIVERY OF JUSTICE TO DISADVANTAGED WOMEN COALITION PROJECT (DAW) DEVELOPMENT ACTION FOR WOMEN'S NETWORK (DAWN) EPISCOPAL COMMISSION ON MIGRANTS AND ITINERANT PEOPLE (CBCP) INSTITUTE ON CHURCH AND SOCIAL ISSUES (ICSI) KAIBIGAN (FRIENDS OF FILIPINO MIGRANT WORKERS, INC.) KAIBIGAN- BICOL LEGAL ASSISTANCE TO WOMEN, INC. (LAW, INC.)- DAW PINOY OVERSEAS PARTY (POP) PHILIPPINE GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION (PGEA)- DAW ATTY. MARY JANE REAL MS. TESS RUEDA UNITED FILIPINO SEAFARERS WOMEN IN DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION