Search This Blog

Wednesday 14 January 2009

A tidal wave of discontent threatens China


 

The most famous Chinese dissident predicts the Government will be trapped between the angry poor and the powerful rich

The whole world is suffering from an economic crisis. Some in the West, like a desperate drowning man clutching at a straw, have said the Chinese Government has a lot of money, let us beg them to save us from the crisis. But they do not realise that the Government in Beijing does not know how to save itself.
 
China has a $2 trillion foreign currency reserve but it also suffers from a huge disparity between the rich and poor: while 0.4 per cent of the people hold 70 per cent of the wealth of the country, a fifth of the population - more than 300 million Chinese - have daily incomes of less than one dollar. This extreme concentration of wealth is a serious problem for the Chinese Government and threatens its grip on power.
 
First, it means that there are too few consumers to sustain a domestic market. So "the workshop of the world" is particularly reliant on the fortunes of the world economy. The Chinese Government announced yesterday that exports had fallen at their fastest rate in a decade, declining by 2.8 per cent in December, on top of a 2.2 per cent year-on-year fall in November. China's exporters are collapsing, pulling down other businesses with them. The Government claims that unemployment is running at 4 per cent in urban areas; but the official figures cannot be believed. According to some serious statisticians, the unemployment rate may have already passed 20 per cent. This makes the severity of the economic crisis in China much sharper than in the US and Europe.
 
Second, growing unemployment and stagnant wages will stoke the rising resentment against the super-rich, threatening the position of the ruling class. The Government regards the tens of millions of peasant workers who will return to the cities after the Chinese holiday season to closed factories and no jobs as an urgent threat. Chinese peasants have a long tradition of rebellion.
 
Following in the footsteps of the US Government, the Chinese Government in November announced a four trillion yuan ($600 billion) public spending package to get the country out of the slump. But this won't work in China. Because China's Government is not elected by the people its policies are run on behalf of the bureaucratic-capitalist class. Instead of acting in the interests of ordinary Chinese, it will try to save the big business enterprises of the ruling elite. But the owners of these big businesses will simply move their assets to safety outside China.
 
The evidence can already be seen: from Los Angeles to the shores of Lake Geneva, China's super-rich are anxiously snapping up real estate, paying with cash. The more turmoil there is - as unemployment shakes the social order - the more capital will flee China. This will exacerbate the vicious cycle.
So the Chinese Government is trapped by a terrible dilemma. It can act to help ordinary Chinese (in the manner of Roosevelt's New Deal in the 1930s) or the bureaucratic-capitalist class. But it cannot do both.
 
If the Chinese Government does not take a New Deal approach, it risks the Chinese people revolting and overthrowing those in power. Across the country there is mounting evidence of popular discontent turning to violence. According to the Chinese Government there were more than 80,000 "sudden incidents" - its euphemism for protests - in 2006; it is now thought that last year the figure rose to 100,000. This rising tide of discontent is Chinese history repeating itself - the end of each dynasty was marked by a crescendo of violence.
 
Military suppression cannot work. Soldiers are the relatives of the peasant workers who have lost their jobs; the families of the military officers will also suffer through the economic crisis. But if the Chinese Government does act to protect the ordinary Chinese, the ruling class of big businessmen and bureaucrats will overthrow it, and replace it with a Government that will protect its interests.
 
The first scapegoat will be Wen Jiabao, the Prime Minister. While his tears, most famously seen after the Sichuan earthquake, could fool the average person, they will not fool the bureaucratic-capitalist class. His end is set, except for the timing of his departure.
 
China has seen many political coups within the ruling class. The most recent examples are from the 1970s. Lin Biao failed in his coup against Mao Zedong in 1971; while Hua Guofeng overthrew the Gang of Four and ended the Cultural Revolution in 1976. A political coup within the Communist Party could provide the temporary stability necessary to solve the economic crisis.
 
But if a solution is not found then the Government will fall. In a democracy, the end of a government is a normal event. However, in a dictatorship it is a matter of life or death. Since Hu Jintao, the President, and Wen took power, changing officials has become bloodier. As part of the political struggle for power more and more officials have been executed or sent to prison - usually under the cloak of punishing corruption. The internal conflict between the various vested interests within the Communist Party is getting bigger with each wanting to make the rival factions scapegoats.
 
From what I hear from people of all backgrounds from inside China they believe, 20 years on from the anniversary of the Tiananmen Square massacre, that time is up for the regime - they believe that in 2009 or 2010 the Chinese will reach the limit of their toleration for the Communist Party. One particular case sums up this mood of discontent: Yang Jia, a man who was executed last year for the murder of six policemen he killed as revenge for being beaten, became a symbol of resistance to many Chinese. He was hailed as a hero on many blogs, pro-Yang grafitti appeared across the country and crowds turned up at court to support him during his trial. The popularity of this man from Shanghai illustrates vividly the rebellious mood of the Chinese people. The intensity of this feeling far surpasses the resentment that was directed against Mao's Government in the 1970s or the corruption of the 1980s.
The people of modern China are different from their ancestors: they no longer expect a wise emperor and fair judges to rule over them. They know that only democracy will guarantee what they want: prosperity, security and fair treatment. The Chinese ruling class think this too - that's why they already send their children and their money to the West.

 
Wei Jingsheng was imprisoned by the Chinese State in 1979-93 and 1994-97 for his human rights activism. In 1997 he was deported to the United States. He was awarded the Sakharov Prize for Freedom of Thought and the Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights Award in 1996




What can you do with the new Windows Live? Find out

Success isn't written in the stars, it's in the length of your fingers

 

Take a look at your hands – you will learn a lot about yourself, Cambridge University scientists say

I
t is the simplest hands-on experiment – and, for once, it is safe to try this at home. Compare the length of your fingers and predict your own future.
Everything from sporting prowess to academic ability, sexual orientation to susceptibility to disease can be assessed on the twin measurements of the length of the ring and index fingers. It is science's answer to palmistry.
 
Researchers at Cambridge University have found that finger length can point to success in the City. Traders with longer ring fingers made the most money – up to six times more than those whose ring fingers were relatively short.
 
The study, published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, found finger size accounted for 20 per cent of the difference. Though the finding provoked scepticism – one blogger tartly responded, "Scientists with little else to do than measure fingers should pull their own out" – the Cambridge boffins are not alone. The significance of finger length has been investigated by research groups worldwide – with surprising results.
 
The ratio between index and ring finger is believed to be linked to exposure to the male hormone testosterone in the womb. On average, men tend to have longer ring fingers and women longer index fingers. The higher the testosterone, the greater the length of the ring finger and the more "masculine" the resulting child – whether male or female. The longest ring finger is known as the "Casanova pattern".
 
Professor John Manning, author of The Finger Book, said the ratio was a "living fossil" of the early period of pregnancy – a measure of past exposure to testosterone, and future potential.
 
Ring finger longer than index finger
 
More often found in men than women, people with longer ring fingers tend to excel on the sports field, especially in running and football.
Scientists at the University of Bath found that children who had longer ring fingers are better with numbers-based subjects such as maths and physics, which are traditionally male favourites. A study this week showed autism may be linked with exposure to testosterone in the womb. Autism is sometimes described as the "extreme male brain" and is four times more common in boys than girls. Finger length might provide an early warning of the condition. Canadian researchers from the University of Alberta have found a correlation between length of the ring finger and levels of physical aggression – as would be expected in the most masculinised individuals.
 
Index finger longer than ring finger
 
The traditional pattern in women, long index fingers can predict a child's academic strengths. Scientists at the University of Bath found that longer index fingers indicated good verbal and literacy skills, where girls dominate. The findings were published in the British Journal of Psychology in 2007. Studies of sexual orientation have shown that lesbian women are more likely to have longer ring fingers, suggesting exposure to higher levels of foetal testosterone. Professor John Manning said research he had conducted suggested that gay men were more likely to display feminised finger ratios, suggesting less testosterone exposure in the womb.
 
However, sceptics have observed that twin studies show that 70 per cent of the difference in finger length is inherited from our parents.

 

See all the ways you can stay connected to friends and family

Saturday 10 January 2009

To quote from Shantaram, ‘The only force more ruthless and cynical than the business of big politics is the politics of big business'.


 


See all the ways you can stay connected to friends and family

The friends of Satyam (Rogue's gallery)?

UK based World Council for Corporate Governance - Golden Peacock Award for 2008 - Satyam (now withdrawn)
 
Ramalinga Raju named Ernst &Young Entrepreneur of the year 2007

 
Take the role of Satyam's independent directors who are now trying desperately to distance themselves from the mess. What is even more depressing is that the independent directors included Harvard professor Krishna Palepu, Indian School of Business Dean M Rammohan Rao, entrepreneur Vinod Dham and former Cabinet Secretary T R Prasad. If a board so exalted and comprising so many eminent people cannot ensure adherence to corporate governance norms, there is something seriously wrong with the system.
 
 
 


Choose the perfect PC or mobile phone for you. Click here

Friday 9 January 2009

At least a fifth of the top 500 listed companies practice "creative accounting"


 

How did Satyam pull off India's biggest corporate fraud?
8 Jan 2009, 1843 hrs IST, REUTERS


Government has vowed to strengthen laws to prevent corporate fraud after Satyam Computer, the country's fourth-largest software company, shocked investors by revealing profits had been falsely inflated for years.

Chairman Ramalinga Raju resigned on Wednesday after revealing India's biggest corporate scandal in memory, sending the company's shares plunging nearly 80 per cent.

The following is an overview of how the fraud escaped detection for so long and what compelled a soft-spoken man born into a family of farmers to risk all.

Q: How did Satyam escape detection?

A: On the face of it, New York-listed Satyam did everything by the rulebook, with an international firm auditing its books, declaration of accounts in accordance with Indian and U.S. standards, and the requisite number of independent directors with excellent credentials, including a Harvard business school professor and a former federal cabinet secretary.

Raju, in his now famous 5-page letter outlining the deception, said no other board member -- past or present -- was aware of the financial irregularities.

Regulators were blindsided, and analysts and experts say there are "systemic flaws" in accounting and audit practices.

About $1 billion, or 94 per cent of the cash, on the company's books was fictitious, Raju said, and manipulation of the cash flow may be a reason why the fraud was undetected.

"Companies have manipulated P&L (profit and loss) accounts before, but cash flow is the Holy Grail -- you don't tamper with it," said Saurabh Mukherjea, an analyst at UK-based research firm Noble Group.

"Auditors generally assume if there is cash, things are OK. But there are plenty of accounting and governance loopholes."

India also lacks a culture of dissent, with shareholders and independent directors reluctant to question company founders.


Also Read
 → Satyam's CFO puts in papers; Board to take call on Jan 10
 → Satyam addresses media: liquidity a concern
 → Govt orders inspection of 8 Satyam subsidiaries
 → PwC says audit of Satyam in accordance with auditing standards


Q: What was the motive?

A: India's $50-billion information technology industry -- the poster child for India's economic liberalisation and rapid growth -- expanded at a scorching pace on the back of outsourcing demand from Western firms.

At the height of the boom, top software firms Tata Consultancy Services, Infosys Technologies, Wipro and Satyam consistently reported annual 50-per cent increases in profits every quarter.

Pressure to maintain this pace of growth, please investors and shareholders and justify inflated P/E multiples during a six-year bull run on the stock market have all been cited as reasons why Satyam cooked the books.

Some news reports say Raju was an aggressive investor in failed dotcoms, and the family also put money in real estate.

Raju, in his letter, said he had "not benefited in financial terms" as a result of the inflated accounts.


Q: Are there other Satyams out there?

A: Most certainly, say analysts and industry experts.

While there has been a plea from chief executives across the board against painting all of corporate India with the same brush, Noble Group estimates at least a fifth of the top 500 listed companies practice "creative accounting".

"At its most innocent it is not illegal, but account manipulation is very pervasive," said Mukherjea.

Q: What needs to be done to prevent another Satyam?

A: Tighter rules for accounting and corporate governance, including appointment of independent directors by selection committees, and greater oversight from regulatory and government authorities.

Noble Group also suggests separation of audit and consultancy functions at companies, and quicker publication of annual reports.




Read amazing stories to your kids on Messenger Try it Now!

Indian Or Israeli?


  

How does Israel's "military" offensive against Hamas and India's "diplomatic" offensive against Pakistan measure up to the laws of war? What are the consequences of the two approaches? Which one is better? 



NAMRATA GOSWAMI
West and South Asia are in turmoil yet again. 
A tenuous unwritten six months cease-fire brokered by Egypt between Israel and Hamas on June 19, 2008 expired on December 19 without an attempt at further renewal resulting in the break out of massive violence in Gaza. For starters, the cease-fire was already in troubled waters due to the dogged posturing by both sides: Hamas's refusal to put an end to rocket launches into Israeli territory; Israel's refusal to open crossings like Rafah for the movement of goods into Gaza from Egypt. 
In effect therefore, the violent outbreak was predictable. On the one hand, an isolated Hamas wants to utilize rocket firings to coerce Israel into uplifting its strategy of economic blockades against Gaza which has virtually rendered the former incapable of meeting the basic needs of the Palestinian people. Israel, on the other, is utilizing a massive air and ground offensive since December 27 till date to violently coerce Hamas into submission before any attempts at a future cease-fire are made. 
Sadly, this time around, the role of international mediators has been limited at best with the US undergoing a transition in its Presidency, the "trustworthiness" of Egyptian mediation under question by Hamas due to the former's false assurances that there will be no immediate Israeli military aggression post-December 19 and the EU's 27 nations unable to come to a consensus on the conflict.  Thereby, a historical tragedy of sorts is unfolding with heightened regional tensions between Israel and the Arab world. 
Meanwhile, in South Asia, India is also facing increasing tensions with its neighbour Pakistan in the aftermath of the Mumbai terror attacks. Consequently, certain security analysts have argued that India should perhaps emulate Israel's military offensive in Gaza in its own response to terror originating in Pakistan. Indeed, public debates in India called for surgical air-strikes on Lashkar-e-Toiba (LeT) camps in Pakistan during and immediately after the Mumbai attacks. 
Unlike Israel however, the Indian government has resisted a "knee jerk" reaction to externally exported terror and by far has shown better judgement with Manmohan Singh, India's Prime Minister stating that a military strike on Pakistan is at this juncture "off" the table. Instead, he stated that certain elements within official agencies in Pakistan support terror activities and must be brought to book by the international community. A diplomatic effort in this direction is underway with the Indian government sharing evidence of Pakistan's complicity in the Mumbai attacks with other nations in order to isolate it for supporting terror as an instrument of foreign policy.
Indians are naturally angry at their country's vulnerability to such terror. It is becoming increasingly clear to them that terror outfits can strike their cities and towns with impunity and that the state's counter-terror mechanism is weak, ineffective and unable to avert these attacks. Data tabulation of civilian deaths in 2008 terror attacks on Jaipur, Ahmedabad, Bangalore, Delhi, Guwahati and Mumbai indicates a figure as high as 800. Though the other terror attacks evoked public anger, it is the blatant nature of the Mumbai attacks by 10 LeT Pakistani nationals holding the country hostage for 62 hours that had raised the prospects of Indian air strikes on terrorist camps in Pakistan.
In order to understand the character of both the Israeli and Indian response to terror, it is rather pertinent to assess how they both measure up to the laws of war. Such an analysis will bring to the fore the nature of both responses, the consequences as well as indicate whether a military or a diplomatic response is the better of the two.
The Laws of War: Just War
The notion of "Just War" is a well honed historical tradition on the rules of war. According to this tradition, there are two aspects in war---recourse to war (jus ad bellum) and conduct in war (jus in bello). 
Jus ad bellum has six principles:
  • The first principle is "just cause," indicating that war could be waged between two legitimate political entities either for self-defence or the protection of human rights. 
  • Second, the authority that declares war must be a legitimate entity within the comity of nations. 
  • Third, war must be guided by "right intentions" and not by any hidden intent of self- aggrandisement by an individual or a state. 
  • Fourth, war must be the last resort. 
  • Fifth, it must have a high "probability of success" for the wager state. 
  • Sixth, the end result should culminate in positive benefits for the target state.
Jus in bello is based on two principles: 
  • "Proportionality of means," indicating that the "means" employed must not negate the good that war brings about in the target state. 
  • The last criterion is discrimination and non-combatant immunity: civilians cannot be targeted in a war.
Case of Israel
Locating the present Israeli military offensive in Gaza within the Just War tradition throws up interesting insights on the effectiveness of a military offensive as the first resort in a country's counter-terror policy. 
First, Israel had a right to self defence since it was Hamas who first launched 88 rockets into Israeli territory on December 24 following an end to the cease-fire on December 19. It must be noted that independent analysts view Hamas's act as a response to the killing of three of its operatives by Israeli forces at the border. Nevertheless, Hamas's act constituted a violation of territorial integrity of another nation as cited in Article 2 (4) of the UN Charter. This is also justified under UN Charter Article 51 which states that "Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations…"  Therefore, in this light, a military strike against Gaza is justified. 
Second, Israel is a legitimate entity in the international community and therefore has a right to self defence. 
Third, coming to the Just War criterion of "right intentions", Israel's intentions in Gaza are unclear. Ostensibly, it wants to stop the Hamas rocket launches from Gaza into its territory but the real goal could perhaps be to teach Hamas a lesson and brutally drive home the fact that it cannot view itself as an equal with Israel.
Israel's military offensive also does not fulfil the "force as last resort" criterion as it did not provide mediators like Egypt or Turkey a chance to work with Hamas towards extending the cease-fire. Neither did it give Hamas an opportunity for a truce by negotiating for a "phase by phase" opening of the crossings between Israel, Egypt and Gaza which could have brought in the much needed basic goods into Gaza. In interviews to the International Crisis Group, the Hamas fighters asserted that faced with an alternative between starvation and fighting, they would rather chose the later.
That apart, the Israeli military strikes also disqualify in the Just War criteria of "proportionality of ends", "probability of success", "proportionality of means" and "discrimination and non-combatant immunity".
The military strikes in Gaza have resulted in a severe shortage of basic commodities like food, water, milk, meat and medicines.Banks have collapsed leaving people with virtually no money to buy provisions. The Israeli strikes on Palestinian government institutions like interior, justice, education, finance and culture have raised doubts not only about the question of "proportionality of means and ends" but also starkly about Israeli intentions. The attacks on the civilian police have resulted in a collapse of the internal structures of law enforcement in Gaza.
Though Hamas is no Lebanese Hezbollah, being far inferior in training and arms, yet the "probability of success" in terms of Israel's so-called prime objective, stopping rocket launches from Gaza, is also under suspect. Though the military offensive might stop short range attacks, there is no guarantee that long range attacks will be thwarted. According to some senior Israeli security analysts, though the Israeli military planning is precise and clear, there is a diplomatic and political inability to state clearly the desired outcome/objectives of the war.
Worse still is the humanitarian disaster that Israel's attacks have created in Gaza. Till date, more than 640 people including children have died in the air strikes and ground offensives. On January 6, an Israeli air strike on a UN school resulted in the death of 40 women and children taking shelter there. Though Israel has claimed that it has given prior warnings to Palestinian civilians of impending attacks, such warnings are ineffective as there is no where safe to go. A case in point is the Samouni family of Zeitoun, Gaza City who left their own house after being warned of impending air attacks by Israeli soldiers but perished in Israeli air strikes while taking shelter in a relative's house.
Israel argues that Hamas utilizes civilians as shields but this does not negate the fact that from its early focused targeting of the Hamas's military wing, the al Qasam Brigade's15 training camps and limited port and costal facilities, Israel has gradually activated indiscriminate aerial bombings on civilian areas. The consequences have been the displacement of 80 per cent of civilians in Gaza with UN observers on the ground stating that a humanitarian tragedy is on the making there.
Case of India
While examining the Indian counter-terror response against Pakistan within the context of jus ad bellum, it is clear by now that India has a case for self defence.
Intelligence reports confirm that the 10 LeT men responsible for the Mumbai attacks came via the sea from Pakistan. Therefore, a military strike on terrorist camps in Pakistan is justified.
Second, India is a legitimate entity in the comity of nations and therefore has the right to declare war in self defence.
An Indian air strike will also fulfill the Just War criterion of "right intention" since India's intentions are to specifically target terror camps in Pakistan's territory in order to safeguard its own territory from attacks orchestrated by terror groups there.
However, a war at this juncture may not fulfill the Just War criteria of "force as last resort" as Pakistan has to be given some time to crack down on terror groups in its territory. There has to be enough peaceful communication between the wager state and the target state before the decision to use force is taken.
Significantly, India is making a serious effort in this direction by giving Pakistan an opportunity to act against terror outfits in its territory. On January 5, India handed over a 69 page "evidentiary dossier" to Pakistan providing detailed evidence of Pakistani hand in the Mumbai attacks. Pakistan, however, is not helping matters much by its belligerent approach of denying any links of its nationals to the Mumbai blasts despite being provided concrete evidence.Subsequently, Indian External Affairs Minister, Pranab Mukherjee is writing about the evidence gathered to his counter parts in other countries to put diplomatic pressure on Pakistan.
These are steps in the right direction regarding the "force as last resort" criterion. The laws of war clearly state that any decision to use force has to be preceded by a serious diplomatic effort providing the target state a chance to right the wrongs. Hence, India's counter-terror response is by far superior to that of Israel within the context of Just War.
With regard to the criterion of "proportionality of ends", India will have to do a real-time "action-consequence" assessment of any military strikes on Pakistani based terror camps. If air strikes do take place due to Pakistan's continued belligerent attitude, India has to ensure that such strikes enjoy precision and do not result in heavy "collateral damage" similar to that of the current Israeli offensive. Also, the end result after Indian strikes should not leave Pakistan worse off than what it is today.
The most crucial criterion of jus ad bellum is, however, the "probability of success" aspect. The question we need to ask here is: what is the "probability of success" of Indian air strikes killing terrorists staying in terror camps, for instance, in LeT headquarters in Muridke, or camps in Muzaffarabad, Lahore, Peshawar, Islamabad, Rawalpindi, Karachi, Multan, Quetta, Gujranwala, Sialkot and Gilgit? The "probability of success" appears low as the terrorists are fully aware of arguments in India for strikes on their camps and therefore must have deserted these camps by now and merged with Pakistani civilians.
The criteria of jus in bello is also very policy informative with regard to any military strikes. Indian air strikes could be disproportionate in terms of civilian deaths in Pakistan as some of the main terror camps are housed near civilian areas. This could result in intense internal unrest in Pakistan, more disturbances in India's border areas like Kashmir and international condemnation.
The US "war on terror" in the aftermath of 9/11 in Afghanistan and Iraq has taken a huge toll on civilians. Afghanistan has suffered almost 1000 civilian casualties per year since 2001. Iraqi civilian deaths since 2003 are far more staggering. According to the Brookings Iraq Index (May 2003-March 2008), the US intervention in Iraq has resulted in 104, 317 civilian deaths. Israel's current military offensive against Hamas may appear tough on terror but will result for sure in further militarisation of Palestinian society, anger at Israel and long term insecurity in the region.
Given this outcome, India therefore needs to tread with caution regarding the military option against Pakistan. Though there is a justified reason for going to war, Just War criteria like "probability of success", "proportionality of means and ends", and "discrimination and non-combatant immunity" rightly indicates the dangerous consequences of a rapid reactionary response. Also, given the porous nature of India's borders and glaring loopholes in its internal security infrastructure, an Indo-Pak war may lead to further instability in the South Asian region. The possession of nuclear weapons by both states is an added reason for caution about any war talk.
Pakistan, however, needs to act more responsibly and undertake serious efforts towards dismantling the numerous terror networks existing in its territory. This is a debt it owes not only to itself but also to its South Asian neighbours as a whole.

Dr. Namrata Goswami is an Associate Fellow at the Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses (IDSA), New Delhi.The views expressed here are that of the author and not necessarily that of the IDSA.



Read amazing stories to your kids on Messenger Try it Now!