SINGAPORE, Dec 21 (IPS) – To activists more accustomed to working against Burma’s military junta than with it, any engagement with the recalcitrant regime will amount to nothing. But to 2001 Nobel Prize winner Josepth Stiglitz, it is a window of opportunity for a country that has known only poverty and repression.

Nobel Prize laureate Joseph Stiglitz (left) and U.N. ESCAP executive secretary Noeleen Heyzer (right).

At a press conference organised here Monday by the United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP), Stiglitz expressed optimism over the prospects for change in Burma’s rural economy. “In general, there is the hope that this is the moment of change for the country,” Stiglitz said.

The former chief economist of the World Bank was in Burma last week to meet with the state’s Agriculture and Rural Development Minister Maj Gen Htay Oo and National Development Minister Soe Tha. He was part of a mission organised by ESCAP aimed at assessing and improving Burma’s rural economy.

ESCAP held a wide-ranging dialogue with the South-east Asian state to boost the country’s agricultural sector and to help it reclaim its status as the rice bowl of Asia. It was a “moment of hope,” said Stiglitz.

“This is the moment of change for the country,” opined the noted economist. “And it would be a mistake to miss this moment.”

But some are sceptical about the changes that Stiglitz and ESCAP expect to bring to a country still ruled by a regime notorious for its oppression and secrecy. “The same as the junta’s sucker bait,” charged one irate member of the audience, as he marched up to Stiglitz after the conference. The colloquial phrase suggests a scheme to deceive the ignorant.

To some observers, however, it is precisely this softer, non-confrontational approach that has seen ESCAP make some headway toward improving the economic conditions of the rural poor in Burma, also known as Myanmar. Some 75 percent of the country’s estimated 57 million people live in rural areas and make up the largest slice of the country’s poor. Malnutrition is rampant and affects over a third of the country’s children.

Burma is still reeling from the effects of Cyclone Nargis, which tore through the rice-growing Irrawaddy Delta in May last year, killing more than 140,000 people.

“The effects of a cyclone last long after the cyclone itself,” said Stiglitz, adding that disaster had devastated the credit system in Burma, affected the supply of fertilisers, and destroyed the livestock.

The long-term impacts of the disaster combined with the effects of the global economic crisis and climate change on Burma have put the country in an even more precarious state. Thus, Stiglitz believes this is an appropriate time for the United Nations regional body, headed by Dr Noeleen Heyzer, to engage with one of Asia’s most oppressive regimes to hasten the country’s development.

“Even a country that is not integrated in the global economy is affected by the global recession,” said Stiglitz. There is increased realisation within the regime that “the world is changing, and you have to change even if nothing else is going on,” he added.

“It is my hope these ideas and analysis will open a new space for policy discussion and a further deepening of our development partnership,” Heyzer said at the event held in Burma’s administrative capital, Naypidaw.

“These development objectives can only be achieved through the successful engagement of local experts and people who know what is happening on the ground. This development partnership, requested by the Government of Myanmar, provides a unique platform for eminent international scholars and local researchers to exchange experiences and ideas with government agencies and civil society,” Heyzer added.

Based on his talks with farmers during his visit to Burma, Stiglitz identified the high cost of credit in the rural areas, with interest rates of at least 10 percent a month, as one of the issues Burma will have to overcome.

“Irrigation has increased the potential for productivity, but because many could not get credit to buy fertiliser and for hydro-electricity, the full potential could not be reached,” he said.

He urged the Burmese government to promote access to appropriate agricultural financing, to boost access to seeds and fertilizers as well as spending on health and education, and create well-paid jobs in rural infrastructure construction in order to stimulate development and raise incomes and spending.

“If you don’t renew your human capital, it depreciates, just as fiscal capital depreciates,” Stiglitz said as he urged the country to do more to bridge the demographic gaps in education in the country.

Stiglitz also noted that well-functioning institutions were critical to success, and that Burma could learn from the mistakes of other resource-rich countries. “Revenues from oil and gas can open up a new era, if used well. If not, then valuable opportunities will be squandered,” he said.

“Economics and politics cannot be separated,” Stiglitz added. “For Myanmar to take a role on the world stage and to achieve true stability and security there must be widespread participation and inclusive processes. This is the only way forward for Myanmar.”

Except I suspect even the half-mad pirate has more brains than to dally in these murky waters in my flooded room.

Rascal had ripped a water pipe off the floor. What type of dog destroys a reinforced PVC pipe? Apparently Rascal is no Beverly Hills Chihuahua. And he was eager to prove it.

I was tempted to shove the pipe down his throat. But you don’t mess with a dog like that. So I did the next best thing: I called the plumber.

“Yes, hi, I need a plumber.”

“Ok,” replied a gruff voice.

“Erm.. Ok..” What do you say to a monosyllabic man who wields a wrench for a living? Probably less than you would to a dog who can tear a pipe off the floor. “Do you need my address?”

“Ok,” the voice said again. As I was about to rattle off my postal code, he continued: “But first, you have to get 100,000 people to sign a petition for me to fix your pipe.”

“What? You need 100,000 what??” I started to wonder if I was getting seasick, with all that brownish water sloshing about my ankles. “Why do you need 100,000 signatures to fix a bloody pipe?”

“I need to know you really want change,” he replied, matter-of-factly. “I don’t need to [do this]. I have enough money and I lead a simple life. I travel by bus and MRT even though I can afford a car. So what’s the point? I don’t need this kind of trouble.”

“I will only do it if enough people want me to lead. If Singaporeans want change, they must have a stake in it and show their commitment by putting down their names. I cannot do this without strong support,” he adds.

That has got to be the most ridiculous thing I’ve heard since, well, forever.

I hung up, thinking where in the world I was going to get 100,000 people to care whether my pipe gets fixed.

For that matter, why would 100,000 Singaporeans care if Tan Kin Lian runs for president? Why should we? After all, he is as likely to succeed where Ong Teng Cheong failed in overcoming the hegemonic machinery as Rascal is likely to ever turn into a well-behaved showdog: virtually impossible.

Even if Tan does become president, 100,000 people will be disappointed to find their efforts have merely contributed to electing yet another president who makes but a few public appearances each year to wave at us. It’s not Tan’s fault: it simply takes more than one man – even as president – to make a change.

Forget 100,000 signatures, Tan only needs 100. Bah, all right, make that 10. If Tan Kin Lian can gather just 10 capable Singaporeans committed to making a change, he might be in for a shout. Instead of the presidential elections, this Singaporean Ocean’s 11 can mount a serious challenge at the general elections.

Remember: 100,000 will do wonders for the ego, but just 10 could make a true difference. Sparta only needed 300 men, why the hell do we need a hundred thousand? We are a pragmatic bunch. Show us an opposition team that is more credible than a motley crew of Kangaroo t-shirt activists, and then you’ll have yourself more than 100,000 supporters faster than Rascal can run with the tail between his legs when I screamed at him like a banshee on heat.

Otherwise, I’ll just have to keep swimming in the shit while the plumber acts like he’s some bigwig former CEO of a multi-million dollar company.

Hold your breath while I go play Pirates of the Caribbean with my dog. It might take 100,000 page views to convince me to keep writing.

I’m getting increasing peeved with health minister Khaw Boon Wan, who has accumulated, in my mind, three strikes in recent times to his name.

Strike 1: he suggested sending the aged in our population, who were uncared for, to live in a village in Batam, Indonesia. Say what? In the subsequent uproar, he claimed to have been misunderstood and misquoted by the media. After all, he said, he was a staunch Buddhist who believes in filial piety.

Right. What, we wonder was his original meaning? Between ‘land is expensive’ and ‘Johore, Batam and Bintan’, we can’t think of anything else that he could mean. for the record, here is what the “good” man said:

“My personal view is, our land is expensive. But we have nearby neighbours in Johore, Batam and Bintan. The elderly want to reach their doctors within half to one hour. So retirement villages in neighbouring countries is possible, barring the cross-border hassle. It is best to find cheap land on short leases.”

Srike 2: following a string of organ trading cases in Singapore, including the high profile case where the CK Tang chairman was charged and convicted for buying a kidney, Khaw proposes the legalization of organ trading.

Brilliant. Money can truly buy you anything in Singapore eh? The donation of one’s organs is a free act of charity, and should not be submitted to the “logic of the market,” says Pope Benedict XVI. Never mind that this opens the door for the poor to be tempted, or even coerced, into selling their body parts. After all, who cares about the poor; it’s only the elite that matter. Bah.

Strike 3: he is currently toying with the idea of legalizing euthanasia in Singapore. Of course, the Catholic Church and MUIS, the Islamic Religious Council of Singapore, have voiced opposition to this proposal.

Wow. This is not a debate on human rights. We don’t have the right to murder another human being, and we certainly do not have the right to kill ourselves. Some call it ‘mercy killing’, pointing to the suffering and citing euthanasia as a humane way to make a dignified exit.

No prizes for guessing what God thinks.

Yes, the ageing population is a key problem facing our society. But I don’t think shipping our old folks off to an island, or allowing them to kill themselves, are plausible solutions!

To have intelligent leaders is essential, but inadequate. We also need stuff like integrity, morality, ethics, and principles. More than academic and corporate success, we need leaders who know what is right, and are willing to stand by it even if it means they risk losing their jobs.

Do men like these actually exist? Yes. Former president, the late Mr Ong Teng Cheong, is an example.

But others, like Khaw, are an embarrassment to the PAP. And it’s about time someone bats them out of the political ballpark.

After a long day chasing stories in the desert heat of Karachi, I was hardly in the mood to be drawn into a long ideological debate. “I believe in journalism,” I quipped.

Thankfully, it worked. He smiled, and went off to bug the next person in line at the balcony overlooking the venue, who was, like me, trying desperately to catch a wisp of the miserly sea breeze.

Fast foward to the present, in the comfort of my airconditioned workspace.

Socialism? Capitalism? How many Singaporeans can actually claim to know what these mean? Feudalism? “What? Huh?” Communism? “Oh, yes, that one is bad. China, USSR, Vietnam. Bad, very bad!”

Welcome to the reality of a brainwashed society.

I’m currently tutoring a distant relative, who arrived last year from China, and was struggling with his Secondary 3 studies. And as I flip through his Social Studies textbook, I struggle with it too — for a whole different reason: what ——- rubbish! History is written by the victors, some wise guy said, but this is completely absurd.

If we’re going to teach our 15-year-olds — and have them subsequently regurgitate — the “terror” of communism and communists in Singapore, something is seriously wrong with our education system. Wait, before you haul me up to spend 20 years in Sentosa for some Marxist conspiracy, I have to clarify: I am no communist. And i’m not a communist sympathiser either. I am, at worst, a socialism-biased journalist. But I take issue with the way our history books are written.

Is it any wonder, then, that Singaporeans are widely regarded in the region and beyond as socio-political retards who are too astigmatic to see beyond the zeroes in their bank accounts?

“So, what do you think of communism?” I asked the boy.

“It’s not good,” he replied matter-of-factly.

“But you’re from China, and this is what your country believes in! Why do you think it’s bad?” I pressed.

“Because this book says so,” he answered.

And that is precisely what we learn. From that young, impressionable age, it would take many years before we hear of the writings of classical sociologist Karl Marx.

Marx described stages in the development of a state, from primative socialism, to feudalism, to capitalism (where we are now!), to socialism, and then communism, which he describes as the ideal state closest to a utopian society.

The problem is: 1) if you knew this, you’re probably in the minority, perhaps 10 percent, of the population who has even heard of this, and 2) by the time you know this, you have already been brainwashed by the education you received to that point, as well as the America-centric North-to-South information flow that taints the picture with their own set of colour-contact lenses.

Either way, you reject this notion of communism as the ideal sociological state, and continue to think of communists as the scourge of the world.

I’m NOT advocating we start calling each other “comrades”. And I’m not suggesting that you believe everything I say either. On the contrary, what I am is urging you not to believe everything you read, or hear, or see.

All I’m asking is you think. Critically. For your self.

So, what do you believe in?

For those who missed the news (WHERE THE HELL HAVE YOU BEEN???), here is Obama’s victory speech.

“Change has come!” says Mr Obama. But has it really?

We can only hope.

Compare Barack Obama to Singapore’s president S. R. Nathan.

Both are from a minority race in their respective countries, both numerically and politically. Both are now presidents. And as we know all too clearly, the latter has done nothing for this country except make a public appearance to wave at the public a few times a year.

We congratulate Mr Obama on his victory, and applaud the Americans for being bigger than racism.

Hopefully, the 44th U.S. President will bring about the “change” he has been promising, and do more than just sit around and collect a multi-million dollar salary. Oh wait, Obama isn’t going to get a multi-million dollar salary! Sorry, I forgot, the U.S. President earns five times less than his Singaporean counterpart.

Sen. Barack Obama has been elected the 44th president of the United States. It is worth pausing a moment just to digest that reality.

A very liberal, 47-year-old rookie senator with no military background – who is not only black but has a last name eerily similar to the man who masterminded the 9/11 attacks and a middle name identical to that of the man whose country we foolishly invaded in response to those attacks – is about to assume the nation’s highest elected office. Three years ago, an aspiring screenwriter peddling a script with this story line would have been laughed out of every studio in Hollywood.

But rub your eyes and cue “Hail to the Chief,” for here he comes: President Barack Hussein Obama.

What does Mr. Obama’s victory mean?

It means that America has shown the world yet again it is capable of the improbable, the transformational: A majority-white country has elected a nonwhite president. Having traveled this year to speak about our elections in a diverse quartet of countries – Brazil, Egypt, Saudi Arabia and South Africa – I can assure you that people in all four were both rooting overwhelmingly for Mr. Obama and fully convinced the American people were incapable of electing him because of his race.

The Baltimore Sun

Elated supporters took to the streets of Chicago, Washington, Atlanta and other cities across the globe, dancing and cheering for their candidate.

“This is the most wonderful night of my life,” said an emotional David White, who grew up during the civil rights movement of the 1960s.

White said he remembers when African-Americans couldn’t go to amusement parks and didn’t think a day like this was achievable.

“I’ve seen this country vindicate itself,” he said. “I welled up with tears just looking at the turnout … I just thank God that I was alive to see it.”

CNN

Truly, I am happy Obama won. Now, perhaps it is time for change to come to Singapore too!

Did anyone say deja vu?

SDP head Dr Chee Soon Juan was fired from his position as a psychology lecturer at the National University of Singapore (NUS) in 1993, over alleged misappropriation of research funds, just months after he joined the opposition party.

But the recent suspension of John Tan comes as a surprise. After all, JCU is an Australian-based institution, and supposedly enjoys autonomy from the Singapore state.

According to the SDP, Tan’s abrupt suspension followed an email complaint by a “Collin Lim”, copied to the Minister of Education, Dr Ng Eng Hen. The contents of that email was not revealed.

The SDP claims that “the University acted out of fear of the Singapore Government and suspended Mr John Tan for reasons other than academic considerations”.

(Read SDP story here)