Why the BBC World Service cuts are bad

UK media shame

24 January 2011

The police seen to think that they have charged the Christmas killer of Joanna Yeates. His name is Vincent Tabak.

S what about her landlord Chris Jefferies, the first suspect who fiercely denied any guilt.

Chris Jefferies was variously described by The Sun as "weird, posh, lewd and creepy", a "blue-rinse, long-haired bachelor", who was "very unkempt and had dirty fingernails" and was "fascinated by making lewd sexual remarks".

The comments were attributed to unnamed students of the highly-regarded former member of the English department at Clifton College. The Daily Mirror quoted another "ex-pupil" asserting that Mr Jefferies, 65, was "obsessed" with Oscar Wilde and his "favourite" work was "The Ballad of Reading Gaol". The paper noted that this poem "tells the story of a man who was hanged for cutting his wife's throat". The Daily Mail wondered if Mr Jefferies could "hold the key" to a murder case in which the victim's flat showed no signs of a forced entry.

So Mr. Jefferies is a little eccentric. Thank god for interesting people. But the media was jumping to the simple conclusion that the guy is weird so he must be guilty. And sadly the police seemed to encourage this.

Despite the charges against Mr Tabak,  Mr Jefferies remains on police bail. He was questioned for three days by Somerset and Avon police who were desperately looking to close this case. It is fair to assume that Jefferies was put under significant pressure.

Officially, he's still a suspect and still on bail. Remember that Mr Jefferies was arrested & bailed - he was not charged.

Vincent Tabak was arrested and has been charged and has now appeared in court, which would suggest that the police have strong evidence to support their case.

But the real issue is that the media publishes pictures and details of their lives all over the news before any charges have been brought against them and before the police have released their names.

In the UK you are meant to be innocent until proven guilty. You are not meant to be guilty by media innuendo.  a

Etihad flight diverts after bomb threat

14 January 2011

An Etihad Airways flight bound for London’s Heathrow Airport was diverted to nearby Stansted airport this afternoon due to a “disruptive” passenger.

“Etihad flight EY19 to London was diverted to Stansted in order to offload a disruptive guest on board,” a spokesperson for the airline said.

An Etihad spokesperson said there was no direct threat to the safety of the plane, which took off from Abu Dhabi. “This was a simple case of inappropriate comments made by a disruptive passenger – there was no threat to the safety of the aircraft or passengers.”

The Captain of the flight seems to have had a rather different view of the incident.

The Etihad spokesman and the National newspaper seem to have missed a number of key details: the passenger threatened he had a bomb and two RAF fighter jets were scrambled into the air to escort the flight to Stansted.

After landing the plane was isolated at a remote part of the airport.

The plane from Abu Dhabi, landed at about mid-day UK time, a spokeswoman for Stansted Airport said.
 

Wikileaks Arabia

24 January 2011 The Guardian

Gerald Kaufman once described Labour's 1983 manifesto as the longest suicide note in history. If ever a set of documents merits this epithet, it is surely the one we publish today. Written by Palestinian officials, obtained by al-Jazeera and shared with the Guardian, the papers are the confidential record of 10 years of efforts to seek a peace agreement with Israel.

It is hard to tell who appears worst: the Palestinian leaders, who are weak, craven and eager to shower their counterparts with compliments; the Israelis, who are polite in word but contemptuous in deed; or the Americans, whose neutrality consists of bullying the weak and holding the hand of the strong. Together they conspire to build a puppet state in Palestine, at best authoritarian, at worst a surrogate for an occupying force. To obtain even this form of bondage, the Palestinians have to flog the family silver. Saeb Erekat, the PLO chief negotiator, is reduced at one point to pleading for a fig leaf: "What good am I if I'm the joke of my wife, if I'm so weak," he told Barack Obama's Middle East envoy George Mitchell.

Palestinian concessions roll on. The Israeli settlements around East Jerusalem? Sold, two years ago in a map which allows Israel to annex all of the settlements bar one, Har Homa. Mr Erekat called it the biggest Yerushalayim (he used the Hebrew word for Jerusalem) in history. Israel's former foreign minister Tzipi Livni acknowledges the pain involved, but refuses the offer. Israel banks the concession anyway. They are building in occupied Gilo today as if there is no tomorrow. Haram al-Sharif, the third holiest site in the Muslim world? That, too, is up for grabs. Mr Erekat said he was prepared to consider "creative ways" to solve the problem of Haram al-Sharif or the Temple Mount.

The surrender of land Palestinians have lived on for centuries prompts more demands. Not only does Israel want all of East Jerusalem, Har Homa, and the settlement blocs of Ariel and Ma'ale Adumim which carve strategic swathes out of the West Bank. Not only does it insist on a demilitarised state. It also wants Palestinian leaders to sign away their future. When Mr Erekat asked Ms Livni: "Short of your jet fighters in my sky and your army on my territory, can I choose where I secure external defence?". She replied: "No. In order to create your state you have to agree in advance with Israel – you have to choose not to have the right of choice afterwards. These are the basic pillars."

Before the extreme right politician Avigdor Lieberman rose to prominence, the papers reveal that Israel asked for some of its Arab citizens to be transferred to a new Palestinian state. Since then, state population swaps have entered the mainstream of Israeli debate, but no one is asking the Israeli Arabs themselves. Has the former nightclub bouncer from Moldova become more Israeli? Or is Israel behaving more like a Moldovan nightclub bouncer?

One requires Panglossian optimism to believe that these negotiations can one day be resurrected. Nineteen years of redrawing the 1967 borders, of expanding the boundaries of Jerusalem, of refusal to accept the return of Palestinian refugees, and of pleading for a fig leaf, has sullied the concept of peace.

The Palestinian Authority may continue as an employer but, as of today, its legitimacy as negotiators will have all but ended on the Palestinian street. The two-state solution itself could just as swiftly perish with it. If that is to be saved, three things have to happen: America must drop its veto on Palestinian unity talks and take up Hamas's offer of a one-year ceasefire; a negotiating team that represents all major Palestinian factions must be formed; and Israel has to accept that a state created on 1967 borders, not around them, is the minimum price of an end to the conflict. The alternative is to allow the cancer of the existing one-state solution to grow and to prepare for the next war. No one will have to wait long for that.
 

Another strike out by Air Canada

22 January 2011

Virgin America has decided to drop Toronto from its network this Spring, less than a year after launching its new service to Canada’s largest city.

Which maybe goes to show just how hard it is to compete with Air Canada on its home territory. The list of airlines that Air Canada has chased out of Toronto is long. The list of Canadian airlines that have closed or been absorbed into Air Canada is also long.

The California-based carrier said it would “indefinitely suspend” service between Los Angeles and San Francisco to Toronto’s Pearson International Airport on April 6, 2011.

“We would like to thank the Toronto airport and community for supporting us,” the company said. “We hope to return to YYZ at some point, but in the smaller Toronto to West Coast markets we were not able to stimulate demand as quickly as we would have liked.”

The airline began flying to Toronto in June 2010, competing against Air Canada on those routes.

Canada/UAE dispute simmers along

21 January 2011

Sultan Sooud Al Qassemi is a non-resident fellow of the Dubai School of Government and a columnist for The National in Abu Dhabi. In the Globe and Mail he argues that Canada needs to meet the UAE half way on landing right.

His final paragraph is very telling:

"A middle-ground approach to this matter can be found. Perhaps the Canadian aviation authorities could consider allowing a trial period of one or two years where the UAE-based carriers are granted the access that they seek. If Canadian jobs are seen to be at risk then this access can be revised. "

So lets see - Canada give EK and EY everything that it needs for two years - by when any damage that might be done to AC has been done and the UAE carriers are firmly establised as the Canadian carrier to South Asia. And then their is a review. Damage done. Nothing offered in return.

I have kept saying that EK will get extra access in time. But not if it keeps behaving like an undiplomatic bully. Just how is capitulation a half way meeting? How about the UAE removes visa fees on Canadians and in return Canada allows 3 weekly flights to YVR (Vancouver) and 3 weekly flights to YYC (Calgary) with the next review in 2013?

Now that is half way.

Airport nonsense from Phuket

21 January 2011

The Phuket Gazette is reporting that the director of Phuket International Airport was transferred from his post last week due to a disciplinary investigation regarding a group of South American passengers who flew out of the airport without passports.

But this story is very strange.

Airports of Thailand (AoT) told the Phuket Gazette today that Prathuang Sornkham was been transferred during the investigation and will become a "Senior Specialist 10" AoT executive.

So he has been transferred to a reduced role depsite the seriousness of the allegations.

AoT president Serirat Prasutanond said that  in October last year nine Paraguayan passengers left Phuket International Airport aboard an Emirates Airline flight without passports. 

But Emirates does not fly to Phuket. On the Phulet Gazettes web site it is alleged that the flight was a private charter from the airline but that it was a 737. Emirates does not have any 737s. And if there was an Emirates flight into Phuket someone would have posted a picture on one of the airline web sites.

How did these people come into Phuket without passports. Were they flown to Phuket; if yes, by who?

Airlines operating out of Thailand use their own staff to carry out passport checks and validate these against boarding passes before they catch a flight. This may have been a private charter; but the Emirates link is highly unlikely.

An initial investigation conducted by AoT found that five or six of its Phuket officers were involved in the ordeal, he said. What ordeal? Strange choice of words.

Narongchai Tanadchangsaeng, deputy director of Suvarnabhumi Airport, has been appointed president of the disciplinary investigation committee, which is expected to conclude its work within 15 days.

Flying Officer Passakorn Surapipith, will be acting director of Phuket International Airport until the results of the investigation are announced.

China - global hawk or global citizen

20 January 2011

The simple answer is no. There are simply too many hawks that want to see an imperial China - and want to see other nations submit to Chinese dominance.

 Hu Jintao is in Washington on a state visit, at a time when Chinese-American relations are deeply strained and likely to get worse. This is the G2 - honestly when it comes to world affairs - the rest of us don't matter - only China and America truly can shape whether we are a world at peace or a world on edge.

Trade is at the heart of the tensions. China maintains a cheap currency to preserve jobs at home. Simple. It keeps exports cheap. But the US ranting on the subject is too loud. Yes the Chinese destabilise international trade but Chinese goods mostly compete with products from Mexico, South Korea, Thailand and other countries; China is stealing jobs from those countries more than from America.

Next is territory - China is claiming the disputed islands in the East China Sea known as the Senkaku in Japanese and Diaoyu in Chinese. China is also claiming chunks of  the South China Sea; perhaps in a search for natural resources; its belligerence is driving neighbors closer to America.

Human Rights will always be an issue; it is more about muzzling dissent and avoiding division. Clamping down on ethnic minorities such as Tibetans and Uighurs and the imprisonment of nobel prize winner Liu Xiaobo have damaged China’s image.

Yet for all their differences Mr. Obama, the 2009 nobel peace prize winner last night hosted a dinner for the man who imprisoned the 2010 nobel peace prize winner. 

One thing Mr Hu wont win is a nobel peace prize; the Chinese support rogue states, such as North Korea, Iran, Myanmar, Burma, Sudan and Zimbabwe. But it is unclear jus how much influence China really has.  

The biggest danger seems to be not trade or diplomacy but military hawks who lead the nationalist parade and play the patriotic card. Hard liners seem to lead domestic affairs in China. And with Mr Hu due to handover power in 2012 even he may have less influence over his country now.

President Obama started out very conciliatory toward China, but Beijing perceived that as weakness and walked all over him. Now Mr. Obama needs to be stronger. And he needs to be strong as the Chinese hawks raise their voices.

Emirates needs some new friends

20 January 2011

Emirates Airline has all those new planes on order - including another 75 or so A380s to be delivered - and it is getting harder for Emirates to find places to fly them to.

The first 25 years were relatively easy for Emirates; using its geographical location, low cost structure and ambitious tourist hub to rapidly build a global network. The next 25 years look significantly harder as countries seek to ensure that their own domestic aviation industries are supported and not overwhelmed by this Middle Eastern juggernaut.

In the latest row - this time with Germany and not Canada - Emirates has hit back at Lufthansa after the German national carrier sought to stop the Dubai company receiving landing slots at Berlin's new airport, which is nearing completion.

An Emirates spokesman said the airline's expansion would contribute to the prosperity of both Germany and the global economy. This is the familiar argument. But not everyone seems to be in agreement.

Emirates wants to fly to Berlin and Stuttgart remain; it already flies to four German destinations. Emirates argues that the flights would benefit trade, investment, tourism and employment, not just in the two cities, but nationwide in Germany.

Lufthansa wants to block the Dubai carrier's bid because it believes the airline has an unfair advantage in its services between the two countries. "We think there is a big imbalance in the allocation of slots," said Wolfgang Weber, a Lufthansa spokesman.

Where have we heard this before!

"Emirates already flies to four airports in Germany while we only fly to one destination in Dubai. They have between five and six times more business on that route as a result." He claimed other European countries, including France and the UK, were more restrictive in their slot allocations to Emirates than Germany

"We can't predict what decision the German government will take. We can only express our opinion," Mr Weber said. "There is no bilateral air traffic relationship with any other country that is as unequal as between Germany and Dubai."

Emirates President, Tim Clark says that the Lufthansa lobbying is part of a campaign to undermine the airline’s business model. “Their mantra is to take the Gulf carriers down, as well as dominate the markets they sit in,” Clark told Bloomberg this week.

Bloomberg said that Mr Clark blames competitors’ failing business strategies from allowing his airline to continue its worldwide expansion. “It has taken European carriers donkeys’ years to adapt their business models to the changing dynamics of global civil aviation,” he said. “They haven’t been able to align their traffic flows to what is going on, whereas we have.”

I have written about the EK business model, lower costs and geographical positioning before.

But Mr. Clark and his airline are not just under pressure from Germany and Canada. Both France and South Korea have refused to allow Emirates further landing rights and attempts to take an A380 to Shanghai appear to have stalled for now.

Winning friends and influencing people may prove a better (albeit slower) long term tactic than the hard line taken against Canada by the UAE government. And if the government is to be consistent this hard line should probably be extended to long - term European friends as well.

In the meantime EK needs to send those new planes somewhere so look over the next two years for significant expansion of routes into the USA and South America and potentially into new parts of Africa.

The brutal truth about Tunisia

18 February 2011 - The Independent

"The end of the age of dictators in the Arab world? Certainly they are shaking in their boots across the Middle East, the well-heeled sheiks and emirs, and the kings, including one very old one in Saudi Arabia and a young one in Jordan, and presidents – another very old one in Egypt and a young one in Syria – because Tunisia wasn't meant to happen. Food price riots in Algeria, too, and demonstrations against price increases in Amman. Not to mention scores more dead in Tunisia, whose own despot sought refuge in Riyadh – exactly the same city to which a man called Idi Amin once fled.

If it can happen in the holiday destination Tunisia, it can happen anywhere, can't it? It was feted by the West for its "stability" when Zine el-Abidine Ben Ali was in charge. The French and the Germans and the Brits, dare we mention this, always praised the dictator for being a "friend" of civilised Europe, keeping a firm hand on all those Islamists.

Tunisians won't forget this little history, even if we would like them to. The Arabs used to say that two-thirds of the entire Tunisian population – seven million out of 10 million, virtually the whole adult population – worked in one way or another for Mr Ben Ali's secret police. They must have been on the streets too, then, protesting at the man we loved until last week. But don't get too excited. Yes, Tunisian youths have used the internet to rally each other – in Algeria, too – and the demographic explosion of youth (born in the Eighties and Nineties with no jobs to go to after university) is on the streets. But the "unity" government is to be formed by Mohamed Ghannouchi, a satrap of Mr Ben Ali's for almost 20 years, a safe pair of hands who will have our interests – rather than his people's interests – at heart.

For I fear this is going to be the same old story. Yes, we would like a democracy in Tunisia – but not too much democracy. Remember how we wanted Algeria to have a democracy back in the early Nineties?

Then when it looked like the Islamists might win the second round of voting, we supported its military-backed government in suspending elections and crushing the Islamists and initiating a civil war in which 150,000 died.

No, in the Arab world, we want law and order and stability. Even in Hosni Mubarak's corrupt and corrupted Egypt, that's what we want. And we will get it.

The truth, of course, is that the Arab world is so dysfunctional, sclerotic, corrupt, humiliated and ruthless – and remember that Mr Ben Ali was calling Tunisian protesters "terrorists" only last week – and so totally incapable of any social or political progress, that the chances of a series of working democracies emerging from the chaos of the Middle East stand at around zero per cent.

The job of the Arab potentates will be what it has always been – to "manage" their people, to control them, to keep the lid on, to love the West and to hate Iran.

Indeed, what was Hillary Clinton doing last week as Tunisia burned? She was telling the corrupted princes of the Gulf that their job was to support sanctions against Iran, to confront the Islamic republic, to prepare for another strike against a Muslim state after the two catastrophes the United States and the UK have already inflicted in the region.

The Muslim world – at least, that bit of it between India and the Mediterranean – is a more than sorry mess. Iraq has a sort-of-government that is now a satrap of Iran, Hamid Karzai is no more than the mayor of Kabul, Pakistan stands on the edge of endless disaster, Egypt has just emerged from another fake election.

And Lebanon... Well, poor old Lebanon hasn't even got a government. Southern Sudan – if the elections are fair – might be a tiny candle, but don't bet on it.

It's the same old problem for us in the West. We mouth the word "democracy" and we are all for fair elections – providing the Arabs vote for whom we want them to vote for.

In Algeria 20 years ago, they didn't. In "Palestine" they didn't. And in Lebanon, because of the so-called Doha accord, they didn't. So we sanction them, threaten them and warn them about Iran and expect them to keep their mouths shut when Israel steals more Palestinian land for its colonies on the West Bank.

There was a fearful irony that the police theft of an ex-student's fruit produce – and his suicide in Tunis – should have started all this off, not least because Mr Ben Ali made a failed attempt to gather public support by visiting the dying youth in hospital.

For years, this wretched man had been talking about a "slow liberalising" of his country. But all dictators know they are in greatest danger when they start freeing their entrapped countrymen from their chains.

And the Arabs behaved accordingly. No sooner had Ben Ali flown off into exile than Arab newspapers which have been stroking his fur and polishing his shoes and receiving his money for so many years were vilifying the man. "Misrule", "corruption", "authoritarian reign", "a total lack of human rights", their journalists are saying now. Rarely have the words of the Lebanese poet Khalil Gibran sounded so painfully accurate: "Pity the nation that welcomes its new ruler with trumpetings, and farewells him with hootings, only to welcome another with trumpetings again." Mohamed Ghannouchi, perhaps?

Of course, everyone is lowering their prices now – or promising to. Cooking oil and bread are the staple of the masses. So prices will come down in Tunisia and Algeria and Egypt. But why should they be so high in the first place?

Algeria should be as rich as Saudi Arabia – it has the oil and gas – but it has one of the worst unemployment rates in the Middle East, no social security, no pensions, nothing for its people because its generals have salted their country's wealth away in Switzerland.

And police brutality. The torture chambers will keep going. We will maintain our good relations with the dictators. We will continue to arm their armies and tell them to seek peace with Israel.

And they will do what we want. Ben Ali has fled. The search is now on for a more pliable dictator in Tunisia – a "benevolent strongman" as the news agencies like to call these ghastly men.

And the shooting will go on – as it did yesterday in Tunisia – until "stability" has been restored.

No, on balance, I don't think the age of the Arab dictators is over. We will see to that."
 

Big changes coming

18 January 2010

Dear Reader - your favourite web site has to change. And I am not entirely sure what it will look like after the changes.

My Hong Kong host - in line with many others - is de-supporting Microsoft's FrontPage extensions software.

FrontPage server extensions were discontinued by Microsoft back in 2006; since then, Microsoft neither releases further updates, nor they offer any support. The newer hosting platforms come with significantly improved hardware, more stable OS, and newer versions of many software packages. However, FrontPage server extensions are no longer supported.

For the period March 2011 - May 2011, my host plans to migrate all our servers in Hong Kong to the latest hosting platform. The server that hosts your account, hoster900.com, will be migrated as well. We will announce the exact maintenance window two weeks prior to the migration. After the hardware migration, the FP server extensions will no longer exist on the server.

I now to discontinue using FrontPage server extensions which will remove certain dynamic components of FrontPage. It also means I will need to better understand HTML as Front Page was essentially a publishing word processor.

So wish me luck and expect changes.

Beijing feels that time is on its side

17 January 2011 Financial Times

Shortly before President Barack Obama visited Beijing for the first time, he set out US policy to China: “We welcome China’s efforts to play a greater role on the world stage,” he declared. “Power does not need to be a zero-sum game and nations need not fear the success of each other.”

I am prepared to bet that Mr Obama will say something very similar when he welcomes President Hu Jintao to Washington this week. And I’m sure the Chinese leader will respond with warm words.

But, beneath the rhetoric, things are shifting fast. There is a long and growing list of disputes between China and the US. Old arguments over Taiwan and human rights are now supplemented by a new set of disputes over currency, trade, the South China Sea and China’s military build-up.

The increasing number of Sino-American disputes is not just a coincidence or a run of bad luck. The global economic crisis has fundamentally shifted the logic of US-Chinese relations. Before the crisis, most Americans were still comfortable with the rise of China. Both countries were prospering economically – and China did not then seem a plausible challenger to America’s position as the world’s only superpower.

Since the crisis, things look different. Both as individuals and as a nation, Americans are taking a less benign view of China. With unemployment in the US still close to 10 per cent, more Americans now blame China for job losses and stagnant wages – hence the rise in protectionist sentiment in Congress and in influential circles in academia. The US government is also increasingly concerned that China is now turning into a serious strategic rival, particularly in the Pacific – hence the increase in the volume of American complaints about China’s military build-up.

Chinese attitudes have also changed as a result of the Great Recession. The country’s leaders are all too aware of the financial difficulties of the US – how could they not be, after secretary of state Hillary Clinton’s humbling request in 2009 for the Chinese government to keep purchasing US Treasury bills? With a greater consciousness of their own strength, China’s leaders are prepared to be more assertive. They are increasingly ignoring the famous advice of Deng Xiaoping, the chief architect of modern China, to “hide our capacities; bide our time ... never claim leadership”. A new assertiveness is on display – whether it involves confronting the US at the climate change talks in Copenhagen, rebuffing American demands on currency or testing a new Stealth fighter while the US defence secretary is visiting Beijing.

The notion that a rising power is likely to clash with an established power has been around since Thucydides chronicled the rivalry between Athens and Sparta. But, in the 20 or so years between the fall of the Berlin Wall and the fall of Lehman Brothers, a different, more optimistic view became the conventional wisdom in Washington. Successive presidents, from Bill Clinton to Mr Obama, argued that globalisation and mutual economic interests meant that America could take a benign view of the rise of China. The profitable web created by trade and an expanding global economy meant that both countries could prosper together. American leaders also argued consistently that economic liberalisation in China would inevitably lead to political liberalisation – and that a more democratic China would be more friendly to the US. “Trade freely with China and time is on our side,” said President George W. Bush.

In the aftermath of the economic crisis, however, it is a rising China that feels that time is on its side. The famous prediction by Goldman Sachs that the Chinese economy will be larger than that of the US by 2027 is often cited in Beijing. Indeed the latest projections suggest that this symbolic moment will happen rather sooner. Recent projections by The Economist pointed to 2019. If, as seems entirely possible, China is still a one-party state at that point, then – for the first time for well over a century – the world’s largest economy will not be a democracy.

Still, just because some of the more optimistic predictions of the liberal globalists have not been borne out to date, it would be a mistake to swing entirely in the opposite direction and to assume that China and the US are now doomed to an ever more bitter confrontation. Even former US secretary of state Henry Kissinger, the supreme realist, pointed out recently that there are examples of established powers accommodating rising powers in a peaceful way – (although Britain and the US, the example he cites, had cultural affinities that do not exist between China and America). Despite the increase in trade tensions, the two countries’ economies are indeed deeply enmeshed – creating powerful lobby groups with an interest in stable relations. As a last grim insurance policy, the fact that both countries are nuclear powers makes a deliberate decision to go to war almost unthinkable.

It is also comforting that the current leaders of both nations – Mr Obama and Mr Hu – are cool pragmatists. Neither man relishes confrontation. The current generation of leaders in Washington and Beijing can probably be relied on to prevent Chinese-American antagonism rising to dangerous levels. It is the next generation that we should be worrying about.

Arab despots should heed events in Tunisia

17 January 2011 The Guardian

The fall from power of Tunisian president Zine al-Abidine ben Ali is one of those widely unpredicted turns of events that hindsight quickly labels inevitable.

Corrupt authoritarian regimes are generally brittle and Mr Ben Ali's was no exception. But few anticipated how quickly a spate of angry demonstrations could become a regime-changing rebellion. Other governments across the region, with populations hardly less repressed than Tunisia's, will look on in fear.

Mr Ben Ali was considered by western diplomats to be a relatively reliable fixture. Under his 23-year rule, the country had the status of a minor player in North Africa – avoiding involvement in wider Middle East disputes and carving out an economic niche as a Mediterranean holiday destination.

Meanwhile, the president, his wife and their extended family built a lucrative commercial empire. Political dissent has been crushed and media stifled. In a dispatch sent in July 2009 – one of the secret cables published earlier this year by WikiLeaks – the US ambassador to Tunis described rising frustration among ordinary Tunisians as a result of "First Family corruption, high unemployment and regional inequities". He also noted that major change would "have to wait for Ben Ali's departure".

Tunisians clearly shared that view.

The trigger was the suicide of Mohamed Bouazizi, an unemployed student who set fire to himself in protest after police confiscated the vegetable stall that was his living. A wave of sympathetic protest then grew, becoming ever more determined in response to brutal attempts at suppression by police.

While the mass mobilisation was sudden, the frustration it expressed has been a generation in the making. This revolution is demographic as well as economic and political. One in five Tunisians is aged 15-24 (as compared with around 1 in 10 in Britain) and youth unemployment is at least 30%. Joblessness is particularly high among university graduates. That is a phenomenon common to many Arab countries as a growing graduate population combines with a decline in the state's ability to provide public sector jobs, while private sectors remain underdeveloped.

The result is a huge cohort of young people with too much time and not enough money. In Algeria, they are known as the "hittists", meaning the people who lean against walls – an emblem of bored, disaffected youth. Members of this generation also have ways of sharing information online that, while sometimes disrupted by state censorship, cannot be entirely silenced. They are potentially a vast source of political upheaval.

That is one reason why governments from Morocco and Algeria along the Mediterranean coast to Egypt, Jordan, Syria and the Gulf will be watching Tunisia with alarm. These are diverse states, but with common features: ossified politics and corrupt elites, lacking any governing principle other than the urge to resist demands for change from liberals and Islamists. They also suffer from cultural and academic sterility – the suffocation of free thought that might seed political and social renewal.

Stability for such regimes relies on a combination of state force and public apathy. It is the latter that changed so markedly in Tunisia. Especially worrying for other Arab leaders will be the fearlessness of the crowd, prepared to confront riot police firing live rounds. Authoritarian regimes rarely survive for long once the illusion of invincibility is shattered.

In recent weeks, there have been angry protests over rising food prices and unemployment in Jordan and Algeria. There were riots in Egypt last November after disputed parliamentary elections.

The lack of legitimacy does not mean Arab regimes are about to topple. The experience of communist states in eastern Europe in the 1980s shows that bankrupt systems can cling on in protracted, decaying endgames. But ultimately, they do fall.

The comparison is revealing. During the cold war, western powers routinely supported the aspirations of captive citizens against their rulers. The west also cultivated dissident intellectuals, recognising the moral power that flows from the defence of open minds against closed systems. By contrast, the US and Europe have propped up blinkered, failing Arab regimes, judging them to be bulwarks against Islamist radicalism. It is a terribly misguided strategy, not least because it conforms to the jihadi narrative of a west hostile to the interests of ordinary Muslims.

In Tunisia, the opposition is not especially Islamic. Mr Ben Ali's attempts to label the demonstrators "terrorists" in the early days of the uprising was a sign of desperation. Presumably, he hoped to buy US sympathy. Much past American policy in the region gave him grounds to think such a tactic might work.

But there are signs of a more sophisticated approach coming from Washington. Last week, secretary of state Hillary Clinton spoke damningly of the failure by Arab states to modernise. Spreading opportunity to ordinary people, she said, was the surest guarantee against extremism.

Europe has been slower to speak out on behalf of disenfranchised Arabs. France, the former colonial power in Tunisia, supported Mr Ben Ali until the very last moment. One minster offered to send riot police to help shore up the regime.

The EU has an obvious interest in fostering political and economic regeneration on its Mediterranean border. The goal has often been discussed at regional summits, but progress is never made because modernisation means breaking up the power monopolies of corrupt elites. It takes a concerted effort of diplomatic and commercial power to encourage such regimes to change. The alternative, as has been proved in Tunisia, is violent change forced from below.

It is unclear whether the country will emerge from this tumult with better leaders. There is at least potential for progress without Mr Ben Ali. That is a warning to leaders across the region. But it also contains a lesson for Europe and the US. Presidents-for-life offering bogus protection against phantom terrorists are not reliable friends. The surest allies for the long term are the ordinary people in Arab countries whose aspirations are being systematically thwarted. It is their friendship the west must be conspicuously courting.

Still in a debt hole?

16 January 2011 The MediaLine

"Just as there were signs that Dubai might be climbing out of its debt hole, Credit Suisse has released a report that puts the size of the emirate’s borrowings above conventional estimates.

Entities 50% or more owned by Dubai’s government and ruler Sheikh Mohammed Bin Rashid Al-Maktoum amount to $129.3 billion, the Swiss bank said in a report dated January 13. It said the debt burden could, in fact, be “much higher than our final numbers owing to the lack of full disclosure.”

The debt of what is popularly known as Dubai Inc, a collection of government and quasi-government businesses and agencies, is usually put at about $110 billion. A restructuring of the debt of Dubai World, the biggest of the Dubai Inc. borrowers, last September brought some improvement in investor sentiment and a handful of bond offerings at the end of last year. But Credit Suisse said it sees new problems ahead in 2011.

“While Dubai World has secured a debt restructuring agreement with its creditors, we think that the issues may not quite be over for the emirate,” Credit Suisse said. “We think that there is a chance of a further rescheduling of debt.”

Over this year and next, Dubai Inc. has to make repayments of $17.5 billion and $17 billion, the bank estimated. The level falls to $9.7 billon in 2013, but it balloons to $26 billion in 2014, when some $20 billion of rescue-financing from Dubai’s fellow emirate Abu Dhabi comes due, Credit Suisse forecasted. It termed the repayment timetable “substantially tight.”

Credit Suisse estimated that Dubai World, the government conglomerate that precipitated the debt crisis when it asked to reschedule loans in November 2009, accounts for almost 40% of Dubai Inc.’s total debt, or $50.2 billion. Direct government debt accounts for another $28.6 billion, with the balance held by the state-owned Investment Corp. of Dubai and other government-related entities, the bank said.

Credit Suisse hasn’t been alone is expressing concern about Dubai Inc.’s ability to meet its repayments this year. A Bank of America Merrill Lynch report December 6 warned that Dubai Inc. faces large redemptions this year, particularly in the first and third quarter. It also warned of “spillovers” to Abu Dhabi because of the two emirates’ business ties and Abu Dhabi’s role as Dubai’s lender of last resort.

“We expect the restructuring to follow the Dubai World model, with modest haircuts on
loans through maturity extensions of five to eight years,” the report said. “Though it remains to be seen, bond holders are likely to be paid in full to keep market access open.”

Dubai’s bond market went into a deep freeze following the Dubai World debt standstill. But it began thawing in the final months of 2010 after the conglomerate reached an agreement with creditors.

Dubai issued $1.25 billion in global bonds in September. The next month Emaar Properties placed successfully up to $500 million in convertible notes due in 2015, increasing the size of the issue from $375 million due to strong investor demand. Moreover, Dubai Electric and Water Authority (DEWA) saw demand for a $2 billion offering oversubscribed by more than six-fold the next month.

“We’d seen an improvement recently,” Tommy Trask, a Dubai-based credit analyst at Standard & Poor’s, told The Media Line. “At the end of last year a number of companies including DEWA and the government of Dubai were successfully tapping capital markets. We reacted to that by raising the ratings on many of these issues.”

On Friday, CityCenter Holdings, the Las Vegas casino part-owned by Dubai World, said it sold $1.5 billion of senior secured notes in a bid to restructure a portion of its debt.
But analysts said the sentiment had lately showed signs of sagging.

Arabtec Holding said last week it planned a five-year, $150 million convertible bond offering and a rights issue of $108.5 million. The financing reflects the company’s need to raise cash in the absence of bank or other finance than an opportunity to meet investor appetite, analysts said.

Trask declined to forecast the outlook for Dubai’s debt market this year. But, he noted, even with the huge debt overhang, some parts of Dubai’s economy are recovering. Citigroup Global Markets estimates real economic growth for Dubai will accelerate to 6% this year from 1.7% in 2010 (it shrank 3% in 2009, Citi estimates).

“You have different industries that have different challenges,” Trask said. “Some industries will be able to tap the capital market because fundamentals are stronger and others will have a more difficult time. For instance, real estate and construction will likely have challenging market conditions.”"

What does Tunisia mean for the Middle East?

15 January 2011

It is am impossible question to answer; but I have no doubt that there are a number of Arab regimes and governments that are thinking could this happen to us.

Tunisia has been in turmoil for weeks. That turmoil has now led to the removal of a disliked President. It has also led to looting and rioting unprecedented in Tunisia.

People are now waiting for some indication that the interim administration is prepared to bring in widespread economic and political changes.

Late on Friday Mr Ghannouchi, who until then served as prime minister, assumed the interim presidency saying his "very first priority" was restoring security.

But then on Saturday the Constitutional Council declared that parliamentary Speaker Foued Mebazaa should be the country's new interim president.

It is still unclear who is in charge.

Realistically, Tunisia is on the fringe of the Arab world; it is also a relatively rich and educated nation. Unrest still appears to have spread into Algeria and Egypt. People power has been empowered.

Hours after President Ben Ali fled Tunisia on Friday, a Lebanese broadcaster, in triumphant tones, ended her report on the first instance of an Arab leader to be overthrown in popular protests by quoting a famous Tunisian poet. The day’s seismic events in Tunisia, the broadcaster, Abeer Madi al-Halabi, went on, would serve as “a lesson for countries where presidents and kings have rusted on their thrones.”

Tunisia’s uprising has led to people suggesting that this is the Arab world’s Gdansk, the birthplace of Solidarity in Poland, which heralded the end to Communist rule in Eastern Europe. That is premature, and it is unclear what or who will emerge as a government in Tunisia.

Even if they serve only as inspiration, the protests offer a rare example of success to activists seeking to bring about change in their own countries.

But it is not just about rising prices and unemployment. I suspect there is also a resentment of governments, including Tunisia, being to close to the Americans. It is the resentment that has been built up by carnage in Iraq, divisions among Palestinians and Israeli intransigence and the yawning divide between ruler and ruled on almost every question of foreign policy.

Economic woes and revulsion at corruption and repression exist in many other countries in the Middle East, American allies like Egypt foremost among them.

On blogger sinply said: "An Arab nation woke up and said enough.”

In the end, the most dramatic change in the old Arab order in years was inspired by Mohamed Bouazizi, the 26-year-old university graduate who could find work only as a fruit and vegetable vendor. He set himself on fire in a city square in December when the police seized his cart and mistreated him.

He is now a martyr to and a Facebook page called Tunisians hailed him as “the symbol of the Tunisian revolution.” “God have mercy on you, Tunisia’s martyr, and on the all free martyrs of Tunisia,” it read. “One candle burns to create light and one candle beats all oppression.”

The regions strongmen — from Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi of Libya to Hosni Mubarak of Egypt — must be concerned by the impact of a popular insurrection.

But do not assume that Tunisia will quickly become an instant democracy; it may be days before the situation resolves itself. What Tunisia needs is a transitional government able to make the streets safe and inspire confidence that the country will be embarking on a genuine democratic transition, not just trading one dictator for another.

Thunderbirds may go - again !

12 January 2011

It has been 46 years since Thunderbird 1 first erupted in a cloud of smoke from under the swimming pool on Tracy Island and Parker drove Lady Penelope around in a pink Rolls-Royce, number plate FAB1.

But Thunderbirds could be about to go again after its creator, Gerry Anderson, said a deal had been done for a new series of the 1960s children's classic. Anderson was talking to BBC Radio 5 Live's Drive programme

Anderson did insist that there would be no more puppets! The show would use "today's technology" and "all the mod cons".

But the five Tracy brothers would all return along with Parker and Lady Penelope and all five Thunderbirds.

The rights to the series are owned by ITV Studios; the broadcaster stopped short of confirming a new series was in development.

Anderson said he had signed a non-disclosure agreement so was unable to discuss the project in any further detail.

An ITV source said: "Clearly it's an important property for us and we are looking at ways of taking it forward and a series is one of the things we are looking at."

Thunderbirds was turned into a live action film in 2004 - directed by Jonathan Frakes; Commander Riker of Star Trek, TNG; but the Hollywood production was poorly received by fans and critics. Anderson described it as "the biggest load of crap I have ever seen in my life". Anderson was right.

Anderson is confident the new series would be rather better. "I don't want to sound conceited but I'm going to make it, as opposed to the movie which was made by other people, and I am confident it's going to be a smash hit," he told Radio 5 Live.

He said he "hated working with puppets ... they can't walk, they can't do anything". I know some people like that !

The programme was this week celebrated by the Royal Mail with a special set of "motion stamps" featuring characters from the children's show. See below.

Bring back Tin Tin - she was always too good for Alan.
 

Bleak Year Coming for Thailand

11 January 2011 Written by Pavin Chachavalpongpun

"With 50,000 red shirt demonstrators on Bangkok's streets in the first weekend of the year, the outlook is grim

For those who wish to maintain their optimism, Thailand this year faces changes in its politics – including an election, for sure, that is designed to return power to the Thai voters. The election will seek to legitimize a new regime.

During the past two years, the Abhisit Vejjajiva government has been accused of lacking legitimacy since it came to power only because of a backroom deal brokered by the military. Last weekend, the demonstrators were back on Bangkok's streets -- estimated at 50,000 by the Thai media and some foreign embassies in Bangkok, a figure denied by the government. They have promised to reappear every two weeks to question the government's legality.

Certainly, for those who are pessimistic, including me, Thailand's political situation can be expected to remain bleak. Since the 2006 military coup and, in particular since the state's brutal crackdown on the red-shirted demonstrators in May 2010, Thailand's fundamental problems have not been seriously addressed. Instead, rhetoric, not action, has become the instrument for the current regime. Prime Minister Abhisit has repeatedly said that he could not call for a fresh election since the Thai situation has not yet returned to normal, and that the country is still susceptible to the imminent threat posed by the so-called red-shirted terrorist network.

While countless allegations against the red shirts have been made, little evidence has surfaced and none seems to affirm that they were actually the threat to Thailand's national security that the government alleged. A large number of scholars who followed closely the violent crackdown at Bangkok's Rachaprasong intersection on 19 May 2011 doubt whether the red-shirts were the real culprits behind the arson attack against the Central World.

One academic recently asked whether tired, hungry and chased red-shirted demonstrators had the capacity, time, technical and floor plan know-how to bring such calculated and well targeted destruction, especially against a building of some 10 storeys at the Central World complex. But presenting the argument in this way could be a dangerous exercise. Nobody in Bangkok is ready to accept it, and certainly not the government. This is because it would delegitimize the state's subsequent hard-nosed policy towards the demonstrators, including the declaration of an emergency decree.

Late last year, the Oxford-educated Abhisit gave a promise to the Thais: he pledged that an election would be organized during the first half of 2011 in order to display his government's sincerity for not staying in power until the end of the term in December. Not everyone was excited about his announcement. Indeed, many Thais believe that there were many reasons behind a long delay of an election. One of them is that Abhisit wanted to ensure that all key positions were filled by key pro-establishment forces, including those in the military and police.

Abhisit appeared to focus mainly on the election as though it was the only solution to the Thai crisis. A bigger question has however been left unanswered: how to reinstall faith and trust in the electoral system? The establishment forces showed in the past that they were willing to employ extra-constitutional means in order to overturn the results of elections which they found unacceptable and threatening to their power interests.

The military coup and the interventions of the court were used to unseat the Thaksin regime and its subsequent proxies in politics. If the result of the upcoming election again proves dissatisfactory to the elites, they could use the same tactics to throw out an elected government. Unless they start to respect the outcome of the election, the Thai conflict will not subside. The red shirts will stage more protests as long as Thai politics continues to be dominated by a handful of elites.

Thailand in 2011 could also be marked by the rise of political violence. The emergency decree in Bangkok and surrounding provinces was abolished in late December last year. Since then, the red shirts have returned to the streets.

The high turnout of last weekend's demonstrators is a reminder that the state should not underestimate the red-shirted movement. On the contrary, although the reds can protest freely now without the emergency decree, they cannot become complacent since the state's security forces stand ready to quell them. Current army chief Prayuth Chan-ocha has let it be known that he has adopted a zero-tolerance policy against the red shirts. If violence breaks out, the army will use force to respond to it. If the situation gets out of control, a military coup is always an attractive option.

The coup will not just be an attractive option, but a lucrative one for the coup-makers. It is an open secret in Bangkok that some past coup makers made a lot of money from staging a coup. Not only did they make money out of a military coup, they usually got away with it legally. Some became highly respected figures in Thai society. This partly explains why a military coup will never be out of fashion in Thailand.

This year, the focus will also be on the role of the monarchy. The stability of the monarchy is intimately linked to the future of Thai politics. Sadly, it remains a strictly untouchable subject. Absolutely for Thais, the issue is a taboo. A series of leaked US Embassy cables allowed many Thais to understand such intimate links. These documents have been banned in Thailand. But the culture of censorship will not last long. Thailand, like many other countries in the world, is fast succumbing to the power of internet. Soon the truth will be revealed.

Lastly, 2011 could prove to be another difficult year in the Thai-Cambodian relations. These bilateral ties have been dangerously erratic. A couple months ago, many Thais and Cambodians thought that their relationship took an upbeat turn when Phnom Penh implemented a friendlier policy toward Bangkok. But the arrest of seven Thais, including one MP from the ruling Democrat Party, who were accused of encroaching into Cambodian territory, spoiled this positive mood. At the heart of the problems lies a great degree of distrust between the two countries. Distortion of history on the part of both has deepened this distrust, and possibly could lead to a new round of armed clashes along their common border."

Pavin Chachavalpongpun is a fellow at Singapore's Institute of Southeast Asian Studies. The views expressed here are his own.

And on and on!

10 January 2011

Dear Ms Petrycki, Punch Media, Toronto. Punch is the PR company acting for Emirates in Canada and the company that published Tim Clark's response to the statement of the Prime Minister of Canada.

10 January 2011

"As a Canadian living and working in Dubai I am truly bored with listening to the nonsense from both sides of this story. Yet another press release (see below) is exactly what this sorry saga did not need.

Mr. Harper’s comments on subsidies were not well chosen. But subsidies come in many forms; Emirate enjoys a competitive advantage from government policies that support the airline:

Labour laws that allow only two year work visas allowing regular turnover of staff; no unions; no pension funds to support; low landing fees (especially compared to Toronto); a 24/7 airport operation. Dubai does not levy any corporate or income taxes and therefore can pay lower salaries. It also primarily employs many lower-cost workers from countries such as India and Pakistan. In its defence Emirates also provides accommodation and health care for the majority of its employees.

Neither Emirates or Etihad has the burden of operating an expensive short-haul network to satisfy domestic demand.

Dubai does not have a ban on night flights like the one enforced at most European and North American airports.

Analyst estimates suggest that Emirates operating costs are some 30% lower than those at legacy airlines such as British Airways and Lufthansa.

EK wants additional flights to Canada. But these are not to fly Canadians to the UAE or UAE citizens to Canada. These flights are primarily to fly residents of South Asia to and from their families and communities in Canada. Dubai is a hub. Air Canada has no interest in flying to the Middle East. Air Canada’s passengers can, if they wish catch an Emirates flight to Dubai, or Etihad to the UAE or a star alliance carrier connecting through Europe.

There is no reciprocity here that is of value to Canada in allowing significantly extended rights to the UAE’s airlines. Canada’s national carrier will continue to lobby against extended landing rights for UAE carriers in the same way that Lufthansa and Air France are lobbying their governments to not extend additional landing rights to Emirates.

In the end the Canadian government was elected to serve the interest of Canadians. If that interest is not being served the people will replace the government.

I am actually all for EK doing well. The revenue earned is important for the UAE at a difficult time for the economy. But it was a significant error to confuse a simple trade dispute with international diplomatic ill-will.

There are Canadians losing their lives while trying to help ensure peace and stability in the Middle East. 154 Canadians have died in Afghanistan. The Canadians used to have a staging base in the UAE to help move troops and equipment into Afghanistan. In a move that reeks of indifference, access to that base was taken away because Canada would not let Emirates Airline uplift even more people from South Asia and fly them to Canada. As a Canadian and a Canadian agency that should be a concern to you; and Emirates should be distancing itself from certain actions of the UAE authorities.

Removing the base confused issues of national security and individual safety with a simple trade dispute.

Then applying visa fees to Canadians was simply raising the diplomatic stakes. Canada is the only ‘western nation’ whose citizens require a visit visa in advance of entering the UAE. But if this is to apply to Canada it should extend to anyone that refuses to allow Emirates to further expand its operations to their country.

This is an issue between Emirates and the Canadian regulators. The trouble is that day after day there are new articles, press releases and statements that have now been escalated to the Prime Ministerial level. Rather then issuing new press releases how about letting the noise abate for a month and then encouraging people to talk and listen.

Emirates and Etihad will get extended landing rights to Canada. The issue is when and where to. And it will probably be drip fed over a period of time

RAScott