By Abraham Telar Kuc. The Nile River is the longest river on the earth, with eleven nation states sharing it and over 487 million people or about 20% of the African population living in the basin countries and they depend partly or fully on the Nile for their daily water use, foods and other economic benefits. The river drains 10 % of the African continent or an area greater than 3,176,541 km2, and its divided to ten different sub-basins with two main feeding sources’ the White Nile and the Blue Nile, which making it one of the worlds largest and complicated international trans-boundary river basins (1). It’s very clear that the long and current regional disputes over the Nile’s waters between the upstream and downstream countries specially Uganda, Ethiopia and other upstream nations who are been the forehead leading the campaign for the lifting of colonial era treaties regarding Nile waters allocutions, governance, management, economic use and other Nile related issues and they been demanding renegotiating Nile river basin for fair shares and equal benefits and which they did in 2010 by reaching and signing of (Cooperative Framework Agreement or Entebbe agreement) to replace all the European colonial agreements, meanwhile the two downstream countries Egypt and Sudan in the other sides refusing to renegotiate or sign the Entebbe treaty and insists on maintaining the colonial era treaties  or what they called “the historical rights” which gave the lion’s share of the Nile waters and the absolute veto to only two Nile countries and ignored the rights of other Nile’s nations. Egypt and Sudan for years been using what they called “the historical rights” guaranteed by the colonial era agreements and their diplomatic influence to block international development funds and loans a policy which its aims only to prevent the upstream nations from establishing or constructing any developmental or economical projects on the Nile River, while Egypt is warring about the potential impacts which could effect its water security level as a result of any construction on the Nile river, the other Nile Basin nations said they are addressing the undergoing social, economic and environmental changes plus the population in the region is growing rapidly which will need more access to Nile basin resources in aim to provide water, food and energy to their people(2). The looming conflict in the Nile Basin region over water recourses governance, allocutions and economic use has been a major security threat to the regional and international peace and stability, the risks of militarizing the Nile water dispute among the basin countries has been a growing serious security threat to the basin region as a result of lacking of middle point agreement on how to share, mange and benefit from the longest river fairly and equally. (3)(4)(5)(6) In past years the downstream nations had already unilaterally constructed dams, used Nile waters for irrigation, industrial and other projects and with the upstream nations complaining about those unilateral projects done by the downstream nations and the none cooperative method and approach of Egypt and Sudan and as an outcome of years of disagreement over the Nile water issues and unilaterally decisions and actions taken by the individual countries claiming the Nile River waters and only favoring their own benefits over other Nile nations. The Entebbe Agreement came in to escalate the none cooperation situation more by geo-politically shifting the control of Nile basin waters away from the downstream nations and gave the upstream countries a legal frame to construct dams, establish different projects and increase their water use for different propos. (7) With some countries see themselves as victims of other Nile countries who had taken an advantage of certain period of time or situation that they were in, which let some of them to see no benefit now in been cooperative with the others concerning the Nile related issues and looks only at their national interests, but still the diplomatic dialogue and inclusive negotiations between the Nile basin nations is the only way forward to build confidence, trust and cooperation for sustainable future of the Nile and mutual and shared benefits for basin members countries. A positive engagement between the Nile basin members now can be observed in some steps taken by the countries were technical dialogue and diplomatic approach has increased the sharing of technical and hydrological data between the basin members countries, capacity building workshops and inter-nations trainings and seminars for technicians, policy and decision makers, government officials, diplomats, scientists, researchers, journalists, local and global think-tank institutions, NGOs, regional and other international stakeholders had really helped in easing the interstate political tensions and putting concord foundation for more regional cooperation which will contribute to a better understanding, enhancing the diplomatic relations  and cooperation among the basin nations. To have a sustainable Nile Basin with equal benefits, comprehensive cooperation, joint management, and effective partnership the diplomatic approach and inclusive negotiations is the only solution to overcome years of mistrust and stand off in the Nile Basin region. *References: – 1- http://www.nilebasin.org/media-center/maps. 2- Dr. Aleu Garang Aleu, Khartoum 2010. The Legal System of the Nile Basin: The impact of South Sudan independence on the Nile water distribution and system management, 3- Aljazeera News, Ethiopia discards Egypt threats over Nile dam, 12 June 2013, https://www.aljazeera.com/news/africa/2013/06/20136128306931161.html 4- BBC News, Egyptian warning over Ethiopia Nile dam, 10June2013,https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-22850124 5- Aljazeera News, Egypt to ‘escalate’ Ethiopian dam dispute, 21April2014, https://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2014/04/egypt-escalate-ethiopian-dam-dispute-201448135352769150.html. 6- Heba Salehand John Aglionby, Cairo and Nairobi, DECEMBER 27, 2017,Financial Times Egypt and Ethiopia clash over huge River Nile dam, https://www.ft.com/content/58f66390-dfda-11e7-a8a4-0a1e63a52f9. 7- Dr. Aleu Garang Aleu, Khartoum 2010. The Legal System of the Nile Basin: The impact of South Sudan independence on the Nile water distribution and system management, …………………………………… The author is a Journalist, Blogger, TV Producer, Cultural, Political and Youth Activist, postgraduate student of Diplomacy and International Relations at the Institute of Peace, Development and Security Studies- University of Juba; and working currently with South Sudan Broadcasting Corporation and be contacted through E-mail:telar.abra@gmail.comor tell No: +211912577222                                        

New memo series provides authoritative legal and case study analysis for why starvation can and should be prosecuted as an international crime.

In the picture Catriona Murdoch.

Boston, MA/The Hague, The Netherlands – June 18, 2019 – Global Rights Compliance (GRC) and the World Peace Foundation (WPF) at The Fletcher School (Tufts University), partners in the project “Accountability for Starvation: Testing the Limits of the Law” have published a series of memos documenting how existing international law might apply to starvation conditions, and why it should be applied to Syria, South Sudan and Yemen (forthcoming).

“Mass starvation is not a natural phenomenon nor is it a haphazard by-product of war,” explains Alex de Waal (WPF), “it is the foreseeable result of intentional actions and should be treated as criminal. This memo series provides the legal and case-specific analysis that establishes how and why accountability for starvation can be pursued.”

“We are at the start of a long road to the effective criminalisation of starvation. While starvation has not yet been prosecuted by an international court,” explained Wayne Jordash Managing Partner of GRC, “there is no legal reason to believe that these challenges of prosecuting starvation are insuperable or even more significant than in the average international criminal law trial.”

“The Crime of Starvation and Methods of Prosecution and Accountability,” by GRC, offers unique insight into why the Rome Statute should be amended, as proposed by the Government of Switzerland, to allow starvation to be prosecuted in non-international armed conflicts. The authors also analyse the elements of the crime of starvation through the relevant international legal frameworks, including International Humanitarian Law (IHL) and International Criminal Law (ICL). It further clarifies the applicable legal framework, detailing how the conduct of warring parties and individuals may constitute a starvation violation.

In addition to the Legal Paper they are releasing two case of study papers analysing starvation violations in specific contexts of Syria and South Sudan. The Syria policy memo by Mohammad Kanfash and Ali al- Jasem, from partner organization, Damaan Humanitarian Organization, analyses patterns of starvation crimes in the war in Syria. With focus on Eastern Ghouta, Aleppo, Deir Alzor and penal starvation, the report documents how segments of the population in what was previously a middle-income, food- exporting country, become exposed to starvation conditions. It addresses the patterns of siege and how the government’s ‘kneel or starve’ strategy repeatedly throughout the war brought entire civilian populations to the brink of starvation.

The South Sudan policy memo by Tong Deng Anei, Alex de Waal and Bridget Conley of the World Peace Foundation demonstrates how both government and opposition forces used starvation tactics, causing hunger, disease, social breakdown and heightened mortality. Humanitarian aid was also blocked, stolen and manipulated, and aid workers were attacked and killed. With focus on Unity State, Wau/Baggari (Western Bahr al Ghazal State), and Yei (Central Equatoria State), the memo details how conflict actors’ decisions created famine or near famine conditions.

A third case study, of Yemen, is forthcoming. This memo series is timely: as the conflicts in both Syria and South Sudan appear to be winding down, the effects of using starvation as a weapon of war continue to impact millions. In Yemen, the use of starvation persists, impacting enormous segments of the civilian populations. Further, in May 2018, the United Nations Security Council affirmed that “starvation of civilians as a method of warfare may constitute a war crime” (UNSC Res. 2417).

This seminal report contributes to the goals of “Accountability for Starvation: Testing the Limits of the Law” project, which seeks to identify how international law may be used to advance the prevention, prohibition and accountability for mass starvation.

Contacts:

Bridget Conley and Catriona Murdoch. World Peace Foundation Global Rights Compliance. Somerville, MA, USA The Hague, The Netherlands. Bridget.conley@tufts.edu catrionamurdoch@globalrightscompliance.co.uk/ 617-627-2243 +31 (0)611232482

About Wayne Jordash and Catriona Murdoch at Global Rights Compliance: Wayne Jordash QC is an internationally recognised expert in the global network of international tribunals and courts and international humanitarian law (‘IHL’) and the managing partner of Global Rights Compliance. He is ranked as a leading silk in both the Legal 500 and Chambers and Partners, where he was recommended as “one of the world’s leading international criminal lawyers”. Catriona Murdoch leads the “Accountability for Mass Starvation: Testing the Limits of the Law” project and is an international criminal and human rights law expert. Called to the Bar of England and Wales she is ranked as a leading junior in both the Legal 500 and Chambers and Partners where she was recommended as “star of the future”. International legal advisory firm, Global Rights Compliance, specialises in services associated with bringing accountability for violations of IHL and international human rights law.

About Alex de Waal and the World Peace Foundation at The Fletcher School: Alex de Waal is Executive Director of the World Peace Foundation and a Research Professor at The Fletcher School. Considered one of the foremost experts on famine, his scholarship and practice has also probed humanitarian crisis and response, human rights, the Horn of Africa, HIV/AIDS and governance in Africa, and conflict and peacebuilding. The World Peace Foundation is an operating foundation affiliated solely with The Fletcher School, that provides intellectual leadership on issues of peace, justice and security.

Women members of a agricultural cooperative for women, after finish the work in the field. The women of Inhanrrime are organized for stimulate the female develop. Photography by Jose Cuesta.

Text and pictures by Jose Cuesta.

In Africa, more than 70 percent of people live in rural areas and depend on agriculture and livestock for their food and sustenance: most of the work in these fields is done by women.

According to a report by the United Nations, women’s economic activity represents a large part of the workforce engaged in agriculture (70 percent), livestock (50 percent), and trade (50 percent), as well as the totality of the food processing sector. 

Women are the backbone of African society, although they rarely appear on the front pages of newspapers or in news headlines. Daughters, mothers, wives or grandmothers support the family and the tribal economy.

On their shoulders lies the responsibility of transporting water from the wells, generally far away, carrying the wood, feeding the children and monitoring their health, as well as many other responsibilities.

Moreover, their memory stores and relays the traditions that pass from one generation to the next one, thus strengthening the social and cultural cohesion of the communities.

Since dawn they work tirelessly to maintain their homes. However, their role in the tribe is generally considered peripheral. They often have no voice when it comes to economic or family matters, and only a few gain recognition for their public or political activities.

Women are the basic and essential pillar of the subsistence economy. From Morocco to South Africa, women are the true driving force of a society that often relegates them to the care and work of the land.

To them: farmers, merchants, housewives, fisherwomen … who sustain life and who put their body and their strength so that we can move towards a better world.

By Prof. Anis H. Bajrektarević. Does our history only appear overheated, but is essentially calmly predetermined? Is it directional or conceivable, dialectic and eclectic or cyclical, and therefore cynical? Surely, our history warns. Does it also provide for a hope? Hence, what is in front of us: destiny or future? One of the biggest (nearly schizophrenic) dilemmas of liberalism, ever since David Hume and Adam Smith, was an insight into reality; whether the world is essentially Hobbesian or Kantian. As postulated, the main task of any liberal state is to enable and maintain wealth of its nation, which of course rests upon wealthy individuals inhabiting the particular state. That imperative brought about another dilemma: if wealthy individual, the state will rob you, but in absence of it, the pauperized masses will mob you. The invisible hand of Smith’s followers have found the satisfactory answer – sovereign debt. That ‘invention’ meant: relatively strong central government of the state. Instead of popular control through the democratic checks-&-balances mechanism, such a state should be rather heavily indebted. Debt – firstly to local merchants, than to foreigners – is a far more powerful deterrent, as it resides outside the popular check domain. With such a mixed blessing, no empire can easily demonetize its legitimacy, and abandon its hierarchical but invisible and unconstitutional controls. This is how a debtor empire was born. A blessing or totalitarian curse? Let us briefly examine it.  The Soviet Union – much as (the pre-Deng’s) China itself – was far more of a classic continental military empire (overtly brutal; rigid, authoritative, anti-individual, apparent, secretive), while the US was more a financial-trading empire (covertly coercive; hierarchical, yet asocial, exploitive, pervasive, polarizing). On opposite sides of the globe and cognition, to each other they remained enigmatic, mysterious and incalculable: Bear of permafrost vs. Fish of the warm seas. Sparta vs. Athens. Rome vs. Phoenicia… However, common for the both was a super-appetite for omnipresence. Along with the price to pay for it.  Consequently, the Soviets went bankrupt by mid 1980s – they cracked under its own weight, imperially overstretched. So did the Americans – the ‘white man burden’ fractured them already by the Vietnam war, with the Nixon shock only officializing it. However, the US imperium managed to survive and to outlive the Soviets. How? The United States, with its financial capital (or an outfoxing illusion of it), evolved into a debtor empire through the Wall Street guaranties. Titanium-made Sputnik vs. gold mine of printed-paper… Nothing epitomizes this better than the words of the longest serving US Federal Reserve’s boss, Alan Greenspan, who famously said to then French President Jacques Chirac: “True, the dollar is our currency, but your problem”. Hegemony vs. hegemoney.  House of Cards Conventional economic theory teaches us that money is a universal equivalent to all goods. Historically, currencies were a space and time-related, to say locality-dependent. However, like no currency ever before, the US dollar became – past the WWII – the universal equivalent to all other moneys of the world. According to history of currencies, the core component of the non-precious metals money is a so-called promissory note – intangible belief that, by any given point of future, a particular shiny paper (self-styled as money) will be smoothly exchanged for real goods.  Thus, roughly speaking, money is nothing else but a civilizational construct about imagined/projected tomorrow – that the next day (which nobody has ever seen in the history of humankind, but everybody operates with) definitelly comes (i), and that this tomorrow will certainly be a better day then our yesterday or even our today (ii).  This and similar types of social contracts (horizontal and vertical) over the collective constructs hold society together as much as its economy keeps it alive and evolving. Hence, it is money that powers economy, but our blind faith in (constructed) tomorrows and its alleged certainty is what empowers money.  Clearly, the universal equivalent of all equivalents – the US dollar – follows the same pattern: Strong and widely accepted promise. What does the US dollar promise when there is no gold cover attached to it ever since the time of Nixon shock of 1971?  Pentagon promises that the oceanic sea lines will remain opened (read: controlled by the US Navy), pathways unhindered, and that the most traded world’s commodity – oil, will be delivered. So, it is not a crude or its delivery what is a cover to the US dollar – it is a promise that oil of tomorrow will be deliverable. That is a real might of the US dollar, which in return finances Pentagon’s massive expenditures and shoulders its supremacy.  Admired and feared, Pentagon further fans our planetary belief in tomorrow’s deliverability – if we only keep our faith in dollar (and hydrocarbons’ energized economy), and so on and on in perpetuated circle of mutual reinforcements.  These two pillars of the US might from the East coast (the US Treasury/Wall Street and Pentagon) together with the two pillars of the West coast – both financed by the US dollar and spread through the open sea-lanes (Silicone Valley and Hollywood), are an essence of the US posture.  This very nature of power explains why the Americans have missed to take our mankind into completely other direction; towards the non-confrontational, decarbonized, de-monetized/de-financialized and de-psychologized, the self-realizing and green humankind. In short, to turn history into a moral success story. They had such a chance when, past the Gorbachev’s unconditional surrender of the Soviet bloc, and the Deng’s Copernicus-shift of China, the US – unconstrained as a lonely superpower – solely dictated terms of reference; our common destiny and direction/s to our future/s. Winner is rarely a game-changer  Sadly enough, that was not the first missed opportunity for the US to soften and delay its forthcoming, imminent multidimensional imperial retreat. The very epilogue of the WWII meant a full security guaranty for the US: Geo-economically – 54% of anything manufactured in the world was carrying the Made in USA label, and geostrategically – the US had uninterruptedly enjoyed nearly a decade of the ‘nuclear monopoly’. Up to this very day, the US scores the biggest number of N-tests conducted, the largest stockpile of nuclear weaponry, and it represents the only power ever deploying this ‘ultimate weapon’ on other nation. To complete the irony, Americans enjoy geographic advantage like no other empire before. Save the US, as Ikenberry notes: “…every major power in the world lives in a crowded geopolitical neighborhood where shifts in power routinely provoke counterbalancing”. Look the map, at Russia or China and their packed surroundings. The US is blessed with neighboring oceans – all that should harbor tranquility, peace and prosperity, foresightedness.   Why the lonely might, an empire by invitation did not evolve into empire of relaxation, a generator of harmony? Why does it hold (extra-judicially) captive more political prisoners on Cuban soil than the badmouthed Cuban regime has ever had? Why does it remain obsessed with armament for at home and abroad? What are we talking about here – the inadequate intensity of our confrontational push or about the false course of our civilizational direction?   Indeed, no successful and enduring empire does merely rely on coercion, be it abroad or at home. However, unable to escape its inner logics and deeply-rooted appeal of confrontational nostalgia, the prevailing archrival is only a winner, rarely a game-changer.  To sum up; After the collapse of the Soviet Union, Americans accelerated expansion while waiting for (real or imagined) adversaries to further decline, ‘liberalize’ and bandwagon behind the US. Expansion is the path to security dictatum only exacerbated the problems afflicting the Pax Americana. That is how the capability of the US to maintain its order started to erode faster than the capacity of its opponents to challenge it. A classical imperial self-entrapment!! And the repeated failure to notice and recalibrate its imperial retreat brought the painful hangovers to Washington by the last presidential elections. Inability to manage the rising costs of sustaining the imperial order only increased the domestic popular revolt and political pressure to abandon its ‘mission’ altogether. Perfectly hitting the target to miss everything else … ** ** When the Soviets lost their own indigenous ideological matrix and maverick confrontational stance, and when the US dominated West missed to triumph although winning the Cold War, how to expect from the imitator to score the lasting moral or even a momentary economic victory? Neither more confrontation and more carbons nor more weaponized trade and traded weapons will save our day. It failed in past, it will fail again any given day.  Interestingly, China opposed the I World, left the II in rift, and ever since Bandung of 1955 it neither won over nor joined the III Way. Today, many see it as a main contestant. But, where is a lasting success? Greening international relations along with greening of economy (geopolitical and environmental understanding, de-acidification and relaxation) is the only way out. Historically, no global leader has ever emerged from a shaky and distrustful neighborhood, or by offering little bit more of the same in lieu of an innovative technological advancement. Ergo, it all starts from within, from at home. Without support from a home base, there is no game changer. China’s home is Asia.  Hence, it is not only a new, non-imitative, turn of technology what is needed. Without truly and sincerely embracing mechanisms such as the NaM, ASEAN and SAARC (eventually even the OSCE) and the main champions of multilateralism in Asia, those being India Indonesia and Japan first of all, China has no future of what is planetary awaited – the third force, a game-changer, lasting and trusted global leader.  ———————- About the author: Prof. Anis H. Bajrektarević,  is chairperson and professor in international law and global political studies, Vienna, Austria.  He has authored six books (for American and European publishers) and numerous articles on, mainly, geopolitics energy and technology.  Professor is editor of the NY-based GHIR (Geopolitics, History and Intl. Relations) journal,  and editorial board member of several similar specialized magazines on three continents. His 7^th book, ‘From WWI to www. – Europe and the World 1918-2018’ has been just realised.

By Reinier W.L. Russell, LL.M. A collector will sometimes sell artworks in order to be able to buy new objects. If this happens a lot, he can be regarded as a an art dealer rather than a consumer. When is that the case? And what are the consequences? To assess whether a person sells an object as an art dealer rather than a private collector, the following, among other things, will be taken into account:

• Does a person act on behalf of others or for himself?
• How often does a person sell works of art? Incidentally or structurally?
• Is profit made and is that the objective?
• How does a person present himself during sale/purchase?

If an art collector is regarded as an art dealer, he loses the protection he has a consumer. It also means that if he sells art to a consumer, the buyer, on the contrary, can rely on this protection.

Two polo players

This is clear from a recent judgement of the Mid-Netherlands District Court. What was the case about? The parties had concluded an oral agreement for the sale of two statuettes of polo players from the Tang Dynasty for the amount of € 250,000. 16 days later, the buyer announced that he wanted to refrain from the purchase. The seller did not agree. Among other things, he had already made commitments with an intermediary in Hongkong who tried to sell the statues on behalf of the owner. Therefore, he could not reverse the sale. Since he needed the money badly, he was not able to advance the amount and to look for a different buyer. However, the buyer refused to pay the purchase price and to take the statues.

Consumer or dealer?

The seller took the case to court and demanded that the contract of sale would still be executed. The buyer defended himself with the statement that he had dissolved the contract in accordance with consumer law. The first question the court had to answer was therefore: Is consumer law applicable? Is the seller a professional art dealer? The seller claimed that he was a collector who incidentally sold a work of art. He did so as a private individual, clearly separated from his company accounts. The Court disagreed with him. In this case, he had sold two works of art that did not belong to him. He himself had written to have consignment of the statues. In addition, it turned out that he regularly sold works of art. He made money out of it, too. And though it was not his main profession, it was clearly more than a hobby. A side activity can also be exercised professionally. After all, the seller had presented himself as a person with long-standing connections in the art trade.

Reflection period for consumer

Consumer law was applicable and thus the statutory reflection period of 14 days upon concluding the sales agreement. As the collector had not considered himself to be a dealer, the consumer buyer had not been made aware of the reflection period, which was consequently automatically extended by one year. Therefore, the purchase had been validly dissolved after 16 days.

More information

Do you sometimes sell a work of art from your collection or do you buy art from a collector and would you like to know what your rights are? Or do you have any other questions concerning art sale and purchase? Please contact us.

By Prof. Murray Hunter.

Love him or hate him, Mahathir Mohamed during his first stint as prime minister was able to instill a great sense of national pride and unity.

Mahathir went on a massive infrastructure drive. Most Malaysians were proud of the Penang Bridge that finally linked the island with the mainland. The North-South Highway project changed the nature of commuting up and down the peninsula. Kuala Lumpur International Airport (KLIA) was built and the development of Putra Jaya gave the country a new seat of administration.

Mahathir’s fait accompli was the building of the KLCC towers in central Kuala Lumpur, which were the tallest in the world at the time. These buildings are now the country’s major icon. Langkawi became a must holiday place for Malaysians. He brought elite Formula One motor racing and built a special purpose circuit for the event. He promoted the Tour de Langkawi as a local version of the Tour de France. He spared no expense on building massive new sporting complexes at Bukit Jalil to host the Commonwealth Games in 1998.

When the member nations of ASEAN abandoned the idea to build a regional car, Mahathir went alone, picking up old technology from Mitsubishi, creating the Proton Saga for better or worse although the national car project has been roundly criticized for losing hundreds of millions of dollars and costing more in terms of consumer lost opportunity.  

Nonetheless, Malaysia became an Asian Tiger and Mahathir himself became an outspoken leader internationally. The country was proud of what it had achieved.  He knew the value of national symbols. The slogan Malaysia Boleh (Malaysia Can) was often heard along with the waving of the Jalur Gemilang (stripes of glory – Malaysian Flag) at public displays of national pride and unity.

The Barisan Nasional was a working government coalition that symbolized national unity through the make-up of the cabinet and its true multi-ethnic flavor. Ministers like Samy Vellu from the Malaysian India Congress and Ling Liong Sik from the Malaysian Chinese Association had high public profiles.

Although Mahathir was labeled as an ultra-conservative Malay, he worked with anyone who could help him fulfil his vision. Businessmen like Vincent Tan, Robert Kuok, Lim Goh Tong, Ananda Krishnan, and Tony Fernandez all had very close relationships with Mahathir. Malaysia Inc. was more important to Mahathir than Malay supremacy.

That’s now 30 years ago. The prime casualty has been national pride and unity. The generally positive perception of the Mahathir era drastically changed when he abruptly sacked his deputy Anwar Ibrahim from office in 1998. The accusations and conviction of Anwar for sodomy polarized the population. The goodwill that Mahathir had built up over more than 25 years in public life was put into question.

Although it was his intention to eliminate his nemesis Anwar from politics, he made sodomy a household word in a conservative society, taking luster away from his legacy.  He was painted by the Anwar propaganda machine and the alternative media as a tyrant with millions of dollars hidden away in foreign banks. In addition, two years of headlines and court reports about Anwar’s sodomy trial took away a sense of innocence, showing Malaysia’s ‘dark side’ with TV pictures showing a stained mattress being carted into and out of court every day on which Anwar was convicted of performing sodomy.

Under weak successors, belief in government further faltered. Respect for national leaders took another hit with Mahathir’s successor Ahmad Badawi painted as someone who slept on the job and enjoyed a luxurious lifestyle while many suffered economically. Badawi was painted by the PKR propaganda machine as corrupt. The dealings of his son-in-law and political adviser Khairy Jamaluddin were portrayed as corrupt nepotism.

Mahathir engineered an ungraceful exit for Badawi, replacing him with Najib Razak in 2009. The Najib premiership was tainted from the outset with rumors of murder and corruption. Najib’s wife Rosmah also became an object of ridicule, bringing respect for the institution of government to an all-time low.

However, it’s not just the corruption of politicians that destroyed respect for Malaysian institutions. The rakyat (people) have always wanted to believe in royalty. Even with stories about royal misdoings, there is no real talk of abolishing the monarchy. Whenever a member of one of the royal families acts in the interests of the rakyat, there has always been public praise and support. However, when members of a royal family act against the interests of the rakyat, the social media react.

Stories have been circulating for years about the misdeeds of Johor Royal Family. The current spat between Tunku Ismail, the Johor Crown Prince, commonly known as TMJ and Mahathir is extremely damaging for the royal institutions. Only the sedition act, a de facto lese-majeste law, is protecting the institution from much wider criticism.

Royal decorations and titles, VVIP service in government offices and special treatment for some citizens over others, shows a muddled Malaysia still clinging to the vestiges of feudalism. These artefacts are doing nothing to unite the country, a hangover from the old days of colonial class distinction.

However, the most powerful source of destruction for national pride and unity is the ketuanan Melayu (Malay Superiority) narrative which has become much more extreme. One of the basic assumptions is that bumiputeras — indigenous peoples – are the rightful owners of the land. From the point of view of the ketuanan proponents, land is not seen as a national symbol and non-Malays are excluded. This is a great barrier to developing any sense of national pride and unity.

The gulf between Malay and non-Malay has widened dramatically over the last two generations as Islam has grown into a major aspect of Malay identity. Citizens once celebrated their diverse ethnicities in harmony. Decrees made in the name of Islam now discourage this. No longer are Hari Raya, Chinese New Year, Deepavali and Christmas shared Malaysian experiences.

The way of life has become Islamized to the point where there is little place for other religions and traditions. Food, dress codes, entertainment, education, the civil service, government, police and the military are all Islamized.

Shared apprehensions about what Malaysia will be have caused the Chinese to close ranks. The influence of Ketuanan Melayu in government policy excludes non-Malay participation in many fields like education, civil service and the military, etc. The younger generation of Chinese today tend to see themselves as Chinese first and Malaysians second. Chinese schools promote language and a strong sense of Chinese culture over a Malaysian identity as a mass defence mechanism.

The New Economic Policy, put in place in 1969 after disastrous race riots as an affirmative action program for the majority Malays, has also done a disservice to those it was designed to help. The thesis of Mahathir’s book The Malay Dilemma was that Malays were basically lazy and needed help from the government is the faulty grounding assumption. The NEP is actually an attack on Malay self-esteem.

Rather than offering something spiritual, Islam has become a doctrine of conformity, where particular rights and rituals must legally be adhered to. Failure to do so in the case of not fasting during Ramadan can lead to punitive legal action.  Any views outside narrow social norms lead to heavy criticism. Just recently the Islamic authorities (JAKIM) in Selangor started investigating a discussion forum on women’s choice about wearing the hijab. Not just freedom of discussion is stifled, but also the right to be creative.  

Islam has buried the principles of Rukun Negara (national principles), the supposed guiding philosophy of the nation. Rukun Negara was once a symbol of national pride and unity but has almost totally been replaced by a Doa (or prayer) before public events. A sense of nation has been sacrificed for the Islamization of public gatherings. As dr. Djawed Sangdel excellently explained in his 5Es general developmental theory for XXI century, “social consensus makes or breaks nation”. 

Today we see much less flag-waving during the Merdeka season. There are more divisional narratives on all ethnic sides. There is disappointment with the political system. Islam is seen by many as something overpowering rather than emancipating. People feel they need to conform to be accepted in society.

National pride and unity are at their lowest ebb since independence, where after 30 years of education the younger generations of Malays see Islam as more important than nationalism. Chinese and Indians are apprehensive about what Malaysia is turning into. Even the Orang Asli – the original inhabitants of the peninsula before the arrival of ethnic Malays from Indonesia — and non-Muslim indigenous people of Sabah and Sarawak identify as second-class.

Malaysia has travelled far away from the aspirations of Tunku Abdul Rahman when the Jalur Gemilang was raised for the first time over a free Malaya in 1957. Malaysia’s economic prosperity is relatively declining in the region and the nation is increasingly strangled by the need to conform. Malaysia appears to be a ship without a rudder, its reform agenda locked away under the Official Secrets Act.

The possibility of racial violence festering once again cannot be overlooked. Divisive narratives are being pushed until one day an unknown tipping point could be reached. The strong sense of social conformity, the exclusion of a national sense of ownership to all, the current totalitarian nature of authority and ketuanan Melayu narratives are a very dangerous mix.  

————————————–

A out the author: Prof. Murray Hunter is an Australian scholar and prolific writer. A long time Asian affairs insider, he is author of several books for US publishers. 

Motto: “It has been a long time since this thought crossed my mind that armies without a uniform are haunting Europe”.

Mircea Diaconu – Romanian European MP

By Corneliu Pivariu.

 The second quarter of 2019 which has just come to an end was characterised by outstanding geopolitical developments which will influence the future of international relations and tensions/conflicts within the reordering of the new poles of world and regional power as well as the further development of the globalisation process.

We are witnessing the development of more recent forms and methods than we used to encounter in the lap of time up to the end of the XXth century for securing the implementation of a new world order and the further development of the globalisation process, activities in which states do not play a permanent and crucial role any longer,  where supranational entities are more and more manifest as important players in the new evolution of the global and regional geopolitical situation.

Therefore, to this purpose certain topics highly popular among the masses of people are being used such as fighting corruption, the rule of law (a definition which hasn’t been agreed upon unanimously even within the European Union as well as the use of the justice system for reaching certain political objectives), minorities’ rights (which are pushed  that far as to become so positively discriminated to offend majority’s fundamental rights), migration, the manipulation of educational system for settling it on other bases aimed at levelling the populations without taking into account their history, traditions or other perrenial values of mankind, applying double standards, the employment of a vast network of NGOs, established in the course of time for attaining aims others than initially declared, the use of social platforms and developing means of communication to stir emotions to replace the truth up to the attainment of the set objectives etc.

A excellent brief review of the current situation was made up by  prof. Anis Bajrektarevic: “economic downturn; recession of plans and initiatives; systematically ignored calls for a fiscal and monetary justice for all; Euro crisis; Brexit and irredentism in the UK, Spain, Belgium, France, Denmark and Italy; lasting instability in the Euro-Med theatre (debt crisis in the Europe’s south – countries scrutinized and ridiculed under the nick-name PIGS, coupled with the failed states all over MENA); terrorism; historic low with Russia along with a historic trans-Atlantic blow with Trump; influx of predominantly Muslim refugees from Levant in numbers and configurations unprecedented since WWII exodus; consequential growth of far-right parties who – by peddling reductive messages and comparisons – are exploiting fears of otherness, that are now amplified with already urging labor and social justice concerns; generational unemployment and socio-cultural anxieties, in the ricochet of the Sino-US trade wars… The very fundaments of Europe are shaking”.

Fighting corruption is a noble goal yet when it is diverted towards political and economic purposes it loses its virtues of redressing society and becomes a formidable weapon in achieving other ends. Actually, it seems that the most hunted for are the corrupt and not the corrupters too often being forgotten the fact that there are no corrupt without corrupters. According to some public data, first rated companies in countries such as the US, France, Germany, Holland, Sweden, Belgium, Luxembourg, Switzerland, etc, affect tens of the world states where in order to get financial benefits of billions of dollars they offer bribes. Only the fines applied to the companies of the said countries sum up to almost 11 billion dollars to say nothing of the penalties of some other tens of thousands of dollars imposed on some wellknown banks in these countries and this is just the tip of the iceberg. Leading banks in Europe have been found laundering hundreds of thousands of dollars for Russia during the last approximately ten years only.

Over recent decades the scope and role of the financial system changed substantially as it grew more rapidly and brought bigger profits than in other fields. In the US only, finance’s share of GDP grew from 14% to 21% between 1960 and 2017, while manufacturing’s fell from 27% to 11% and trade’s declined from 17% to 12%. The financial sector is twice as large as trade and manufacturing sectors. 

During 1960-2017, finance almost doubled its profits, from 17% to 30% of total domestic corporate profits, while manufacturing’s share shrank by almost two thirds, from 49% to 17%.   

Thus, recent technological, ideological, institutional  and political changes have drastically transformed finance, enabling it to penetrate and influence all spheres of social life, so that  the experts in the field consider financialization as the new avatar of today’s world. 

In relation to migration, the theories launched since 2000s concerning the necessity of a mass migration in order to replace the aging population and to secure the workforce needed by European economies, are confirmed by a 2018 World Health Organisation study which revealed that the total number of migrants in certain European countries is 3-4 times larger than the official figures. They would represent around 10% of Europe’s current population, namely roughly 91 million people, most of them in France – 7.9 million (12.2%), Germany – 12.1 million (14.8%), Spain – 5.9 million (12.8%), Holland – 2 million (12.1%), Sweden – 1.7 million (17.6%), Switzerland – 2.4 million (29.6%).

As regards their integration into society, things are completely different to the way they are disclosed publicly. Whether over the previous decades the new comers sought, for the most part, to adjust and adapt to the European way of life, the massive groups of migrants haven’t got  the slightest intention to integrate themselves; on the contrary, and the examples presented by independent media are quite frequent. Does Germany agree with poligamy if it accepts Muslim refugees who brought with them their wives and children to whom all prerequisites are granted, including financial means of living, in order to settle there, even if they are not showing the slightest intention they want to integrate into society and have a job?

Under the complex circumstances of the current developments of the international situation, the 67th annual reunion of The Bilderberg Group took place in Montreux, Switzerland, between May 30th and June 2nd, 2019, and was attended by around 130 invitees from 23 countries. The Bilderberg  Group was established in 1954 to foster dialogue between Europe and North America and brings together political leaders, experts in sectors such as industry, finance, media, military, academics. Roughly two thirds of the invitees are coming from Europe (the easternmost countries represented are Turkey, Romania, Bulgaria, Finland, Estonia) and one third from North America. Around 25% of them are political and government personalities and 75% from other sectors. This year, the USA had 34 representatives, Great Britain – 12, France – 8, Germany – 8, Turkey – 5, Bulgaria – 1. No Romanian representative participated.

Among the 13 main topics we notice: A stable strategic order; What comes next for Europe? (Brexit was a separate topic); The future of capitalism; Climatic changes; China; Russia; The ethics of Artificial Intelligence.

In an analysis devoted to the 2019 reunion, International Policy Digest mentioned that one of the best characterisation of the Bilderberg Group could be a quotation from Joseph Stiglitz: “The ones at the top learned how to extort money from the rest of the world in a way the rest of the world was not aware. That’s their true innovation. Policy is the one which sets the rules of the market, yet policy was monopolized by the financial elites who filled their pockets.” 

It seems that among the topics discussed was the one concerned with securing that the chancellor position  after Angela Merkel’s will be transfered to Annegret Kramp Karrenbauer  (known under the acronym  of AKK). We do not rule out that the future leadership of the European Union, which will be voted by the middle of this month, has been decided on that occasion, too. Let us not forget that Ursula von der Leyen, intended to be Jean Claude Junker’s successor as president of the European Commission, is a member of the Bilderberg Group (she attended this year’s reunion). Her nomination stirred a huge wave of discontent in Germany and a recent poll shows that 53% of Germany’s population opposes her appointment, and president Junker considered that her nomination was made in a non transparent way.

The current German minister of Defense, Ursula von der Leyen, is known as an advocate of setting up an European Army and in a recent interview to Der Spiegel she called for the establishment of an European super-state: “My goal is (the achievement of) the United States of Europe”… At the same time, the Belgian prime minister, Charles Michel, nominated to become the next president of the European Council, declared that the east-European countries opposed to taking over migrants should lose certain of their rights as full members of the Union. Even if all four nominees for key positions of the EU are known as advocates of federalising Europe, their task is by no means simple and easy and their being chosed exclusively from the western countries draws another thick line in Europe where the new eastern members are left on the second or third row.

A multi-speed Europe is a reality, not a project, yet the dreamed for achievement of the United States of Europe cannot be reached through discriminating treatments. The declaration of a very important Dutch businessman who said enough time ago that the future of Europe is a union of 75 states having 5 to 10 million inhabitants each is still worrying. It seems that the dictum  divide et impera found a new application…

Divided by internal conflicts, the EU is not in a position to retrieve the cohesion and consistency of a long term strategic thinking and is losing – at least at the present moment  – the fight for the deserved place in the world hierarchy. Experimenting in Europe, before spreading globally, the uniformity of the populations, erasing the peculiarities of nations and abolishing national borders is presumably wished for in the most secret labs of globalisation. If this test would succeed in Europe, it has chances of success globally.

This is still far from being achieved even if different armies without a uniform are wandering all over Europe, if those who want this globalisation for their own benefit and not for the benefit of the entire society have enormous financial means, even if social engineering and Man 2.0 are looming in Silicon Valley. What does not kill us makes us stronger.

About the author:

Corneliu Pivariu Military Intelligence and International Relations Senior Expert

A highly decorated retired two-star general of the Romanian army, during two decades he has led one of the most influential magazines on geopolitics and international relations in Eastern Europe, the bilingual journal Geostrategic Pulse.

By Jomo Kwame Sundaram, Dr Michael Lim Mah Hui

Over recent decades, the scope, size, concentration, power and even the purpose and role of finance have changed so significantly that a new term, financialization, was coined to name this phenomenon. 

Financialization refers to a process that has not only transformed finance itself, but also, the real economy and society. The transformation goes beyond the quantitative to involve qualitative change as finance becomes dominant, instead of serving the needs of the real economy.

Financialization involves the growth and transformation of finance such that with its hugely expanded size, scope and concentration, finance now overshadows, dominates and destabilizes the productive economy. 

The role and purpose of finance has been qualitatively transformed. Finance used to profit from serving production and trade. Traditionally, financing production involved providing funds for manufacturers to finance production, and for traders to buy and sell.

Financialization, on the other hand, turns every imaginable product or service into financial commodities or services to be traded, often for speculation. Instead of seeking profits by financing the productive economy and trade, finance is now more focused on extracting rents from the economy. 

Finance is hegemonic, dominating all of society without appearing to do so, transforming more and more things into financial products and services to be traded and sold. But financialization could not have happened on its own. 

Its nature and pace have been enabled and shaped by ideological, legal, institutional and deliberate policy and regulatory changes. Regulatory authorities, both national and international, can barely keep up with its transformative consequences. 

Size matters

One aspect of financialization refers to the size of finance relative to the whole economy, with the financial sector growing faster and securing more profit than other sectors. The simplest and most popular measure of finance uses national income accounts for ‘finance, insurance and real estate’ (FIRE). 

In the US, finance’s share of GDP grew from 14% to 21% between 1960 and 2017, while manufacturing’s fell from 27% to 11%, and trade’s declined from 17% to 12%. The financial sector is almost twice as large as both trade and manufacturing sectors. 

The growth of shadow banking, referring to activities similar to traditional banking undertaken by non-bank financial institutions that are not regulated as banks, is a growing and significant source of credit and accounts for much of the growth of finance. 

Such institutions include hedge funds, private equity funds, mortgage lenders, money market funds and insurance companies. These financial institutions, including traditional banks, have used securitization, ‘off-balance sheet’ derivative positions and leverage to create, manage and trade securities and derivatives, ballooning its business volume. 

With heightened concerns about growing financial fragility, more sophisticated measures have been introduced to estimate ‘shadow banking’. Most country-level measures show shadow banking increasing rapidly before, and more worryingly, after the 2008-2009 global financial crisis!

At the same time, finance has also secured the most gains in the US, taking advantage of the sector’s ability to leverage more than non-financial corporations, engaging in financial innovations and trading complex and opaque products netting super profits. 

During 1960-2017, finance almost doubled its profits, from 17% to 30% of total domestic corporate profits, while manufacturing’s share shrank by almost two thirds from 49% to 17%. 

Jim Reid of Deutsche Bank estimated that that the US financial sector made around US$1.2 trillion (US$1,200 billion) in ‘excess profits’, relative to the previous mean, in the decade before the 2008 global financial crisis. 

Greater concentration 

There are contrasting views of whether bank concentration leads to greater or less financial stability. But size certainly does not guarantee either good banking practices or financial stability. 

In fact, the global financial crisis suggests that the “too big to fail” syndrome encouraged moral hazard. Big banks take on excessive risk as they believe they have a safety net — governments will bail them out to prevent a financial system collapse. 

Over the years, US banking has become more concentrated. This accelerated with the abolition of the Glass-Steagall Act and its replacement with the Graham-Leah-Bliley Act in 1999 which saw the creation of universal bank behemoths combining commercial and investment banking activities.

The top five banks in 1990 held less than 10% of total bank assets; by 2007, they had 44%. Seven years after the 2008-2009 Global Financial Crisis, the US banking industry is just as concentrated, with the top five banks – JP Morgan Chase, Bank of America, Wells Fargo, Citibank and US Bancorp – holding US$7 trillion, or 44% of total bank assets. 

Meanwhile, asset management is even more concentrated than banking. Together, the ‘Big Three’ – Blackrock, Vanguard and State Street – are the largest shareholders in four-fifths of listed US corporations, managing nearly US$11 trillion, thrice the worth of global hedge funds. Such asset management relies on banks for leveraged access to financial markets. 

Undoubtedly, many regulators have replaced previously weak regulation, which failed to check spreading systemic risk before the 2008-2009 global financial crisis, with new rules. But these do not seem to have effectively checked more recent abusive practices. 

“Money is what powers economy” – as professor Anis H. Bajrektarevic writes – “but our blind faith in (constructed) tomorrows and its alleged certainty is what empowers money.” Recent technological, ideological, institutional and political changes have drastically transformed finance, enabling it to penetrate and dominate all spheres of life such that financialization is the new avatar. 

About the authors:

Jomo Kwame Sundaram, a former economics professor, was United Nations Assistant Secretary-General for Economic Development, and received the Wassily Leontief Prize for Advancing the Frontiers of Economic Thought.

Dr Michael LIM Mah Hui has been a university professor and banker, in the private sector and with the Asian Development Bank. 

***
Photography by PNG