If the democratic reforms recently undertaken by Myanmar, a once dysfunctional and paranoid socialist state turned hardcore military pariah, could be attributed to a smell, it would probably resemble a bucket of KFC chicken. Since the dramatic thawing of US-Myanmar relations following the political ascent of President Thein Sein and his quasi-civilian regime in 2010, diplomatic figures such as Hillary Clinton, UK Foreign Secretary William Hague, and even President Obama have dropped by – and corporate America came along for the ride too. Multinational players from Ford and Hilton, to Coca-Cola and Google are now trying to find their place in what the IMF calls the “next economic frontier in Asia”.Many have questioned Washington’s fast embrace of this long-isolated Southeast Asian state, which is still accused of overseeing vast human rights violations and employing discriminatory policies toward ethnic minorities. Are we to believe that after decades of crippling US-EU sanctions and trade embargoes, which nearly collapsed Myanmar’s manufacturing base and made anti-retroviral drugs and other medicines unaffordable, the West is now enthusiastically emboldened to extend a hand in genuine support for peace and the rights of the population and minorities? Sure, that narrative is warm and fuzzy, but one should review all sides of the equation, especially when billions upon billions in profit remain up for grabs. Myanmar is pristine and extremely underdeveloped, and it holds abundant natural resources, from gold, gas, and oil, to uranium, precious gems, zinc, and copper.It’s not just about the resources though; Myanmar is a huge potential energy exporter whose transformation promises to have a major impact on the regional economy. Most importantly, Myanmar sits on China’s southern border, making the country a vital trade and energy crossroads for Beijing, which is keen to keep Myanmar in its economic orbit as the Obama administration ‘pivots’ to the Asia-Pacific. As the country continues on the trajectory of reform, it may find itself in a contentious wedge between rival superpowers sooner than later, especially since the US has shown interest in expanding military ties with Myanmar as part of its foreign policy strategy, much to the discontent of China, who has practically been Myanmar’s sole investor for the past two decades. Observers from Myanmar took part in annual US-led military exercises in Thailand known as Cobra Gold for the first time in February 2013, and on a recent visit to the White House, President Sein boldly called for direct military-to-military training.IMF to the rescueNobody doubts the fact that far-reaching economic and currency reforms were long overdue for Myanmar, where it was once common to receive loose cigarettes or packs of gum in the absence of small change; shopkeepers would also receive payment in euros and offer US dollars and other foreign currencies in change, and the currency exchange system was in absolute disarray. The immediate question is, what the kind of economic model Myanmar will adopt, and what will be the ramifications? It can gradually develop its domestic industries with capital controls, trade protection and subsidies until they mature enough to compete internationally, while focusing on steering investment into manufacturing and services sectors to train the workforce in skills and technology. Or, it can swallow the pill of the Washington consensus and the International Monetary Fund (IMF).In that scenario, Myanmar would see reduced public investment in rural development, health and social services, and a reliance on private international banks that favor multinational corporations rather than domestic industries by keeping affordable credit out of the reach of many local companies and start-ups. In other words, it can place priority on foreign corporations and investors by rapidly integrating itself into the global economy at the expensive of the human infrastructure upon which future productivity depends. For all intents and purposes, it looks like Myanmar has already sided with the IMF. According to IMF chief Christine Lagarde, her institution had a direct hand in designing the recent currency overhaul that ended in the moves to float the national currency, the kyat.IMF mission chief Meral Karasulu was quoted saying how Myanmar could see strong growth if it is willing to “take advantage of its rich natural resources” and “young labour force”. To the ears of a cynic, that may translate into ‘sell us your resources on the cheap by exploiting your unskilled labor base’. It shouldn’t surprise anyone that the kyat has depreciated and hit record lows against the US dollar, making that cheap labour all the more cheaper. History tells us that Western development strategies place much more interest on extracting raw materials and turning poor countries into markets for Western goods, rather than advocating policy that fosters strong national industries that allow countries to take off and break free of the low-income trap. Myanmar would be wise to avoid those pitfalls as best it can, if it is allowed the space to do so. The tight-lipped LadyNobel laureate Aung San Suu Kyi is the subject of big-budget blockbuster films and global praise, but inside Myanmar, she’s garnered a surprising amount of criticism from her rank and file following her ascension into parliament after more than a decade under house arrest at the behest of the former military junta. In June 2012, outbreaks of violence in western Myanmar left nearly 200 dead and hundreds of thousands of the ethnic minority Muslim Rohingyas displaced following sectarian clashes with Buddhists. President Thein Sein was criticized internationally for referring to the Rohingya, who resemble Bangladeshis, as “illegal immigrants”, although Suu Kyi’s National League for Democracy party maintained a near-identical stance on the issue. Washington, as well as Suu Kyi, remained questionably silent on the plight of the Rohingya, which the UN classifies as one of the world’s most discriminated ethnic minorities. Suu Kyi’s silence can be attributed to the complex chauvinistic and xenophobic nature of the Theravada Buddhist culture practised in Myanmar.The pervasive climate of Buddhist nationalism in the country ensures that she would face a backlash from her future voter base if she takes the side of the Rohingya Muslims. Suu Kyi is widely expected to run as a presidential candidate in the 2015 elections, and she has already disenchanted many activists by praising the military, despite previously accusing them of heinous human rights abuses. Since she entered politics, she has curbed her criticisms of the regime and hasn’t offered comment on the countries ongoing conflicts with various ethnic minority militias throughout the country. It should be remembered that Suu Kyi was a hardline advocate in favor of Western economic sanctions on Myanmar, which created enormous suffering for the population. It’s difficult not to see Suu Kyi has disingenuous, as she now frequents the World Economic Forum calling for foreign investment that could have benefited her people years ago. It appears she’s had a change of heart since she now has the prospect of standing for elections.From Beijing’s sphere to Washington’s OrbitIt’s difficult to ascertain what prompted Myanmar’s flight toward the West. While the inept and unsustainable nature of the former political and economic system was clear to everyone, some say that Myanmar resented China’s stranglehold over their economy, likening it to a colonial relationship. There is no doubt that Beijing will look at expanding US-Myanmar military ties as a threat and a provocation, especially if Myanmar continues morphing into a US ally. As once anti-imperialist generals become US-friendly strongmen, and principled activists begin to look more like calculative politicians, Myanmar’s transformation is key to US strategies of containing China and resuscitating its economic muscle through trade with Southeast Asia. As institutional repression is dismantled, there is a real danger of movements and leaders that once championed civil liberties and human rights becoming enablers of neoliberal capitalism, indiscriminate privatization and deregulation. The fact that nearly all-Western leaders still refer to the country under its colonial title, Burma, may be a cynical reflection of prevailing economic attitudes toward this dirt-poor, resource-rich, and geo-strategically crucial Asian state. … Read More
Bank of America settles $1.7bn over faulty mortgage disputes
MBIA will get a 5% stake in BoA, as well as receive a $500 million credit line. MBIA will also have no further payment obligations on any of its insurance policies held by Bank of America.In exchange, the bond insurer will drop its litigation brought against Countrywide Financial, a BoA mortgage subsidiary. Countrywide’s out of control lending of shoddy mortgages all but destroyed MBIA when the housing bubble burst. The company has already paid out $3 billion to policyholders on ‘bad’ BoA loans on some $20 billion in securities it insured and BoA allegedly ‘misrepresented’ to clients.MBIA Chief Executive Jay Brown has hailed the deal as a ‘significant milestone’.MBIA shares surged to the highest since September 2008 on the news, up 57% after the settlement news broke. BoA shares also closed up 5.2% in New York at $12.88.If MBIA didn’t settle with BoA, it would have risked running out of money within months. Previously MBIA had accused BoA of ‘dragging out’ the litigation, but on Monday, Brown said he appreciated the bank’s efforts in arriving at a fair settlement.“This comprehensive and important settlement is a very positive step forward for both Bank of America and MBIA,” Benjamin Lawsky, New York’s superintendent of financial services, said in a statement.“It resolves significant exposure and expensive litigation for Bank of America, while also giving MBIA a path forward,” said Lawsky.High stakes paybackThe 2008 crisis was the perfect financial storm, and MBIA, formally the largest bond issuer in the United States, just barely survived. Suffering from heavy losses from ‘bad’ mortgages through Countrywide and BoA, the company’s market capitalization dropped from $10 billion pre crisis to its current $2 billion valuation.After the US Federal Reserve cut interest rates to record lows, the real estate market became the driving force of the economy. Looking to capitalize on the market, investment banks, driven by short-term profits, issued too many loans to low and moderate income borrowers in 2006-2007 to people buying homes, fulfilling their ‘American dream’.Investment banks starting providing loans to keep up with demand for home purchases, but the loans proved to be harmful, because it left them with very little equity in their property. Payments were deferred, and eventually, an enormous number of homeowners defaulted on their mortgage, which left the banks, and their bond issuers, with huge liabilities.The MBIA settlement is a continuation of BoA’s marathon payouts to regain credibility within the industry. In January the lender reached an $11.6 billion settlement with government mortgage agency Fanny Mae and in April BoA settled a class-action lawsuit by investors who said they were misled by around $350 billion mortgage investments from Countrywide.Next Hurdle: NY Attorney General plans to sueThe same day it settled with MBIA , a fresh accusation against BoA came from New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman for violating last year’s national mortgage settlement by failing to process hundreds of refinancing requests in a timely manner.Wells Fargo also allegedly did not carry out the requests on time.The Attorney General cited complaints of 210 prompt-processing violations by Wells Fargo and 129 by BoA.Last year the banks agreed to provide $25 billion in relief to homeowners to make reparations for foreclosure misconduct during the housing mortgage bubble which triggered the 2008 financial crisis. … Read More
Local election dinosaur LibLabCon attack Nigel Farage (03May13)
http://www.youtube.com/v/Kb0xnBWs_KM?version=3&f=videos&app=youtube_gdata Read the article - Local election dinosaur LibLabCon attack Nigel Farage (03May13)
"Generation Without Fear" Demands Free Education in Chile
A massive student demonstration raises demand to end economic policies created under Pinochet Dictatorship … Read More
New database reveals China’s ‘secret’ aid to Africa
The database, which was developed by the Washington-based Center for Global Development and AidData, includes 1,673 Chinese development finance projects worth US$75 billion in 50 African countries from the years 2000-2011.It provides detailed data, including an interactive map which breaks down information to country and project levels. The database creators say it was developed in order to provide transparency regarding China’s aid to Africa.“China treats its aid activities as a state secret and this is an attempt to uncover what’s going on,” database creator Andreas Fuchs told Reuters.Beijing has come under criticism for allegedly exploiting Africa’s natural resources, providing support to corrupt regimes, and undermining good governance, debt relief and environmental policies promoted by traditional Western donors.China rejects the assertions, which have been put forth by some African and Western aid experts and officials. Accusations disprovedThe data sheds new light on China’s financial aid and breaks down previous allegations that Beijing is solely looking out for its own interests, Parks said.“They do a lot in the health sector, they do a lot in the government and civil society sector…a lot of things not usually appreciated as activities supported by the Chinese government,” he said. “It’s just striking the diversity of the work they do in the development arena.”According to the database, the largest number of Chinese aid projects is in the health sector, totaling 149 projects accounting for $676 million. Contributions in the government and civil society sector came in second place, with 133 projects totaling $170 million.Double standard?While experts accuse China of ill intent when it comes to aid in Africa, other major donors have managed to avoid such criticism.According to Parks, the Chinese figures revealed in the data are on par with US aid to Africa during the same period.”Pound for pound, when you compare the US versus China, the total official finance is roughly comparable,” he said. He added, however, that “the composition of the official finance is very different.”Other major countries have become involved, too – mainly India, Brazil, Russia, Turkey and Iran.“The increased interest in Africa by these new actors has been due to the realization that Africa has much to offer,” Mwangi Kimenyi, senior fellow and director of the Brookings Institution’s Africa Growth Initiative, said in a March report titled ‘Top Five Reasons why Africa should be a priority for the United States.’According to Witney Schneidman, a non-resident fellow for the Africa Growth Initiative, tapping into Africa’s opportunities – like China has done – is simply a logical thing to do. He told the How We Made it in Africa website that the “region is poised for an economic takeoff.” … Read More
Dartmouth College suspends classes after campus activists receive rape threats
Several Dartmouth College students have received rape and death threats following a Friday protest against sexual assault, racism and homophobia on campus and in administrative policies. In response to the threats, the college has suspended classes, announcing that it would hold “alternative programming… that promotes respect for individuals, civil and engaged discourse, and the value of diverse opinions,” according to a letter obtained by Think Progress.As reported by the Chronicle of Higher Education:Continue Reading… … Read More
‘Maduro is old hand in the government, would pursue same policies as Chavez’
RT: Polls suggest Nicolas Maduro is set to win the election. But he is widely seen simply as a proxy for Chavez. Is he likely to retain this backing if he is elected?Francisco Dominguez: I think if he continues with the policies of Chavez’s government – that is to say the social programs, the redistribution of wealth, the free health, free education, expansion, increased democratic inclusion of the people and so on – there is no reason for him not to have this support. Judging by the size and the enthusiasm of the crowds he was able to draw out throughout the very short span of electoral campaigning, I think he will.RT: But the social policies that Chavez has pursued have led to crumbling infrastructure, double-digit inflation, corruption and crime. Will Maduro be capable of handling these challenges?FD: The economy of Venezuela last year grew at 5.8 per cent and according to the economic commission of Latin America in 2013 the Venezuelan economy is going to grow by 5.3 per cent. There have been massive improvements in infrastructure, motorways, bridges, new undergrounds, trains, busses and so on, and there is plenty more to do. Regarding inflation, this was something that a few years ago was 32-35 per cent now it’s in the region of 20 per cent, all of these things have to be addressed of course, I think the economy is strong enough and the areas of the world economy that are growing are Latin America, to some degree Africa and certainly central Asia. And Latin America including Venezuela is quite well linked into it. I think it’s going to benefit continually from the relationship. So, I don’t think there is too much to worry about there. The question is whether he will be able to manage what is coming ahead, given that he is an old hand in the government. He has been there since 1998, with various high level positions. I think he also has the experience.RT: A lot of experience in the government, but what about the military, Chavez was in the military. He had a lot of influence and he had support from the military, you can’t say the same for Maduro, and it is very important to get that military backing isn’t it, in that country?FD: Judging by the behavior of the military during this election, and during what we call the transition between Chavez being in Cuba and coming back, there was plenty of speculation that there would be some kind of split. I’m a very close observer of Venezuelan reality and I haven’t observed any single indication of that what-so-ever. And there is no reason why this can change.RT: Capriles is advocating a free market economy, will he not get a lot of support for that and is it not perhaps time for the country to change direction?FD: It depends what you mean by a free economy. If you are in their shoes and you look around and see the crisis in the United States, you don’t want to go down that road, if you look at what deregulation and the free market economics have done to Europe, I’m sure they don’t want to go down that road. If they look around in Latin America and they see some serious state intervention, serious government participation in the economy, guiding intervention when necessary, then Latin America’s actual performance is pretty impressive compared to these other places that I’ve mentioned, so in that sense going back to totally unbridled free economics is not going to work and they’re not going to embrace it.RT: You’ve mentioned the United States there, are we going to see any change in relations between the two? If Maduro gets in will we see the same policies being pursued?FD: They were already talking. The Venezuelan government and the United States administration and the purpose of the talks, which actually were directed and led by Maduro, and now also by Elias Jaua, the current Vice President. The purpose of this conversation was to normalize relations between the two. Clearly there are very important sections within the Obama administration that want to normalize relations with one of the most important suppliers of oil that they have in the region.Therefore everything was going fine until US assistant secretary Roberta Jackson said that she finds it very difficult to believe free and fair elections will take place in Venezuela. Venezuelans felt very offended for two reasons: one, they felt that this is not correct, and secondly this is an unacceptable interference with Venezuelan affairs. Therefore they stopped the conversation. So my sense is, that as soon as the air clears and as soon as Maduro is inaugurated, which I’m sure he will be as everybody has been predicting, then I’m sure those talks will resume and they will have tough negotiations ahead of them, Maduro and the United States. Latin America wants this to be sorted. … Read More






